Far out Please help 5d or MK II

I have no idea what to do.

Heres my situation:

I've been studying photography since the start of this year. Absolutely loving it I might add! I have been using an eos 3 film camera for the majority of the year and have sold a couple film prints. I still dont mind getting into the darkroom, but I love digital also.

I have a 350D and no decent glass.
I enjoy shooting the urban environment, landscapes, experimental stuff, portraiture and surfing.

Over the past 6 months I have saved around $7000 (aus) to splash on a new setup and have been waiting for the rebates. Now that they have pretty much arrived I dont know what to purchase.

I have my heart set on a 5D or a 1d MK II
All I want is for my camera to produce crisp pictures. I understand its often the lens that contributes to this more than anything so here is my question.

Would a 5D equipped with a canon 70-200 2.8 IS produce a "crisper" or better quality photo than a 1D MKII equipped with the same lens.
Both cameras mounted on a tripod with the same focal length.

I know its not really fair to compare these cameras since they are quite different, but I would love to know how different they are interms of image quality.

Please help me out

5D would definitely be better.

Chris Stewart wrote in post #4038226
Would a 5D equipped with a canon 70-200 2.8 IS produce a "crisper" or better quality photo than a 1D MKII equipped with the same lens.
Both cameras mounted on a tripod with the same focal length.

Ok I own both cameras so the 5D kicks the 1D as far as IQ goes. 12mp vs 8mp.

How ever try surf shots with the 5D umm 1D auto focus system kicks the 5D.

Basically if it moves 1D if its landscape or people 5D.

Hope this helps.

I would suspect that the 5D, having a larger sensor and more pixels plus a later generation processor giving it a better high ISO capability, would produce better quality images. However, it will be a close run thing and both will produce results that you will be very happy with. Without very close examination, I doubt that you would really notice any significant difference.

Rather than trying to choose by image quality, which is marginally different, I would suggest that you pick the camera best suited to what you want to shoot!

These cameras are very different animals and aimed at different people, so one is probably much better suited to you. The 1D II is a high speed camera aimed at action photography and photo journalism, best suited for sports etc. The 5D is the better landscape and portrait camera.

Whilst each camera can be used for any subject, each has advantages in their own field and disadvantages in the other's. The 1D has the superior frame rate etc. for sports but a smaller sensor which hampers wideangle work for landscapes and reduces DOF control for portraits (for example).

I recommend that you decide which features are important for the work you want to use it for, then see which camera best meets those needs.

thanks guys. Do you think the Id is the better all round camera when compared to the 5d. In all honesty i dont know where my photography is going

Chris Stewart wrote in post #4038425
thanks guys. Do you think the Id is the better all round camera when compared to the 5d. In all honesty i dont know where my photography is going

Not for the subject matter you want to shoot. Don't worry about the 1-series phenomena. For your shooting subject the 5D is the camera of choice. If you were wanting to shoot sports/motorsports, etc. then a 1-series would be the camera of choice.

cant comment too much on the 1d, but the 5d IQ is amazing hey... better than my 40D just incase thats another option for you... more true to life and i think looks better when pixel peeping. Feel more comfortable shooting with low light to the point that il use iso 1600 whereas 40d i really prefer to stay under 1000.

What state you in Chris?

I think the image quality comparison of these two cameras is as easy as comparing the sensors. The 5D sensor has the same pixel density of the 1DMK2, just more of them.The high ISO noise performance is very close between the two, as is overall colours etc.So while they have different processors and the sensors have other differences , for all but laboratory standard testing it's a fair statement to say the 1DMK2 image is just a cropped 5D image. So for big prints the 5D has an obvious advantage.

Chris Stewart wrote in post #4038226
I have a 350D and no decent glass.

i think everyone is forgetting this... better glass always precedes better camera. assuming you have no good glass means kit lens/digital only third party lenses, you need all new lenses before you even think about new bodies.

Chris Stewart wrote in post #4038226
I have no idea what to do.

Heres my situation:

I've been studying photography since the start of this year. Absolutely loving it I might add! I have been using an eos 3 film camera for the majority of the year and have sold a couple film prints. I still dont mind getting into the darkroom, but I love digital also.

I have a 350D and no decent glass.
I enjoy shooting the urban environment, landscapes, experimental stuff, portraiture and surfing.

Over the past 6 months I have saved around $7000 (aus) to splash on a new setup and have been waiting for the rebates. Now that they have pretty much arrived I dont know what to purchase.

I have my heart set on a 5D or a 1d MK II
All I want is for my camera to produce crisp pictures. I understand its often the lens that contributes to this more than anything so here is my question.

Would a 5D equipped with a canon 70-200 2.8 IS produce a "crisper" or better quality photo than a 1D MKII equipped with the same lens.
Both cameras mounted on a tripod with the same focal length.

I know its not really fair to compare these cameras since they are quite different, but I would love to know how different they are interms of image quality.

Please help me out

5d !

ed rader

haha thanks guys.

Now if anyone is interested in selling their 5d please let me know.

cheers chris

Don't discount the 40D, you are shooting such variations, the 40D does do everything very well, as sure the 5D will give the edge at the still shots, Plus with a 40D, gives you cash to spend on Glass
Also with the new MK2 5D upgrade soon, many will upgrade and I think the 5D market be good for a 2nd hand option, then you will have the best of both worlds

Choderboy wrote in post #4038612
The high ISO noise performance is very close between the two.

Are you sure?

From what you've said I'll also vote for the 5D

After you choose which body you need,I would definetly look into getting some L quality lenses.
If your doing urban landscapes,the 17-40L comes to mind....I'm in NYC and that lens is on my camera 90% of the time.....

Mike