I am considering buying a used camera for sports photography. I primarily shoot soccer and tennis using a 70-200 F2.8 non IS as my primary lens. I have noticed that I can purchase a 1D Mark IIn between $500 - $700 or a 1DIII anywhere from $900-$1200. I have been using a canon 40D for around 4 years now so I know either will be a significant upgrade. I have read a lot of praise about the IIn but was wondering if I would get more for my money purchasing a 1DIII. I would like to get around 2-3 years of good use and that is my concern about buying a IIn. Is the IIn technology starting to fall way behind?
The mark 3 has many advantages to the 2n starting with reduced weight thanks to the better battery, easier command system for changing settings & higher ISO's
I went from a Digital Rebel to a 20d, to a 1DmkIIn, to a IDmk3 and to a 5dmk3. For outdoor sports the AF on the MkIIn is slightly better IMHO but the Mk3 is a better overall camera plus you don't have to use 2 hands to use many of the functions. I got 3500+ shots on one battery on my Mk3 plus it feels a bit lighter.
One quirk you should consider about the Mark III that doesn't exist in any of the other 1D series cameras is not all the autofocus points are user selectable. If this might bother you (it drove me nuts and I've owned all the 1D series bodies except the original) I would select the 1D Mark II N.
Totally agree with the above posters. I love my 1D2N but having used a 1D3 I would say that there is no comparison. The lack of self-cleaning sensor and the archaic menu system requiring a FW400 connection for some settings just puts the1D2N into the back of the closet.
Add one more to the list of those who found the 1D Mark III to be a significant improvement over the 1D Mark II or 1D Mark IIN.
I'm one of those who found the 1D Mark III AF to be better for shooting action than the that of the 1D Mark II or N, and that was even before the 1D Mark III AF fixes.
Further the increase, even if not large, from 8 to 10 MP was noticeable to me, and I found the 1D Mark III files to be more pleasing to the eye than those of the 1D Mark II or 1D Mark IIN. There is also a noticeable improvement in high ISO capability. Even if the 1D Mark III screen is one with relatively low resolution, the increase in size was a nice improvement, and the changes in the user interface and the weight reduction of the 1D Mark III mentioned by others made the camera, to me, more user friendly.
While the 1D Mark IIN was a superb camera in its day, it is now approaching 7 1/2 years since its release, and its technology is starting to show its age. Also note that Canon already announced a while back that it is no longer servicing the 1D Mark II, and I would expect that they will be making a similar announcement about the 1D Mark IIN in the relatively near future. While I'm sure that you would still be able to get one serviced at an independent shop if it has access to parts, a camera of that age is likely to have lots of clicks on the shutter, and the likelihood of the need for a shutter replacement or other repairs is higher than it would be for a newer body.
If given the choice to spend a few hundred dollars more for a 1D Mark III, going in that direction would be an easy choice for me.
Thanks everyone for your input. I believe my decision will be for the 1D Mark III. I think the deciding factor is the fact that canon will stop servicing the IIn soon. Well I am off to the Buy/Sell forum to see what I can find. Thanks again!
Don't mean to hijack the thread but, honestly, if you are looking at the III then you should look at the Mark IV. Once you start shooting sports you will want to shoot more and more fast action shots. Having said that, you may want to check out the Rebel T4i. It has a full viewfinder and shoots 5fps. As you can tell I am strictly an amateur photographer. My sport is lacrosse.
agree with what people are saying but i will give a little bit of love to the 1d2n.
i have shot with all 1d series body with the exception of the 1dx. i shot the 1d2n alongside the 1d3 many times.
the 1d2n is an excellent body for the money and if shooting outside i would have no worries at all. it just gets the shot and does it well. obviously if you have the $$ a 1d4 or 1d3 are an upgrade especially if you shoot inside or under the lights. but if not, i would not hesitate to use a 1d2n over the 1d3.
don't forget that back in the day sports illustrated shooters used the 1d2n and many cover shot were taken with this body.
you really need to think about saving up for a 300 f/2.8 or 400 f/2.8
grant
shot below taken less than two years ago w/1d2n & 400 f/2.8 IS
I would also add re: lenses. You may want to consider a 200mm f/2 IS and a 1.4 III extender which would drop the 200mm to a 280 f/2.8 (very close to the 300mm)
My 1D III was superb in AI servo mode. Better than my 1D II for sure, has much lower noise above ISO 800, infinitely better battery, much better ergonomics, better LCD and VF and noticeably lighter.
OP is comparing a III with a IIn, not a II. Big difference between IIn vs. the II in ISO performance, features, functions, LCD size, etc.
By way of comparison, I ditched and replaced my II's with IIn's quite a few years ago, as soon as the IIn's became available. However, despite the III, the IV, and the X having come out since, I still use my IIn's to this day.
Bought a blue dot III brand new.... sold it a few months later to replace it with the IV, which I still have and use along side with the trusty IIn's. The older II's are not in league with the IIn's.
If I were starting from scratch today, I'd put more money in glass than body, and I'd consider the high value to performance ratio that the IIn continues to offer for sports photography.
Focus Locus wrote:
OP is comparing a III with a IIn, not a II. Big difference between IIn vs. the II in ISO performance, features, functions, LCD size, etc.
Really big difference, surely you jest especially on ISO performance. Main difference was weaker AA filter so SOOC jpgs were a lot better. Most of the other stuff is very minor except for better and larger LCD.
Purchasing a IIn for around $500+ is sure hard to pass up. with my current budget I can justify the difference between a III and a IIn but just cannot make the jump to a used IV that is well in the $2000 area. I also agree with the comments of investing in glass which will be on my list later but for now I need to have another body just in case my current body malfunctions. I really do appreciate everyones comments and suggestions, there are some very good pros and cons being made and also making my decision harder; however, I think by the comments that either body will be a good choice.
