purely an amateur, i tried both over the past year and kept the 1Ds (a minority decision here). preferred the 1Ds for the *look* of the files, 1-series handling and build, and AF. didn't really need the high ISO. i use mine for the same purposes you list, and have a 1D and 1D II for sports, etc.
like most of the 1-series cameras, you must be disciplined to expose well to avoid noise. i often have exposure compensation set to +1/3 to +2/3, just for safety.
also, Panamanian humidity might cause you to value the 1-series ruggedness a bit more highly.
Easy answer: 5D. I still have my 1Ds by the way. But with poor battery life, high ISO noise, poor display and frankly, slow to use interface of 1Ds it is hard to recommend it over 5D.
Mind you, I have some excellent shots with the 1Ds but it really is a tired old camera compared to 5D. Indeed, despite owning 1DsII, I still LOVE to use my 5D. Such a compact camera and a joy to have around.
having recently bough a used 1ds and coming from a 1dmk2 which i still got, i wanted to keep all the atributes the 1d series has. as you and mike pointed out this what i use my camera for, iso 100 landscapes.
it seems to have a steep, if not vertical learning curve which iam slowly mastering. the files are lovely but watch that exposure. as far as the battery life goes, yes its short. but long enough for a session even with a IS lens.
two shots with the 1ds
3 shot stich vertical
http://205.214.76.22/attachment.php3?attachmentid=11977&stc=1&d=1191265175.jpg
three shot horizontal stich
http://205.214.76.22/attachment.php3?attachmentid=12152&stc=1&d=1192394518.jpg
Simon, as they say, it is the person behind the camera that takes the picture, not the camera! Lovely images.
As you say though, exposure is key. With all my other cameras, I can adjust the exposure up with very little ill effect. With 1Ds, it is deadly. Underexpose by a couple of stops and you are in trouble.
But for exposures that are right on the money, you are rewarded with excellent images....
I vote for the 1Ds. The files my 1Ds produce are excellent and allow you great flexibility when processing in RAW. As for noise, I have learned that if you process the RAW file correctly, the noise is well controlled up to 800 ISO. The 5D may not require as much processing; but, the body is more prone to dust, its auto-focus is less capable, and it provides less control of the photographic process. The 1Ds is unparalleled by any non-1d body.
I recently went through this same dilemma. I bought an excellent 1Ds with low shutter count. For what I do, it's an amazing camera. Yes, the 5D is more modern (and I'd argue easier to use)...smaller, lighter, better high ISO performance.
Things I love about the 1Ds: AF system, eye-popping performance at low iso, build quality, lots of custom functions, 7 shot auto bracketing (VERY useful for HDR)...all the things that make a 1 series camera special.
Things I don't love: Battery system sucks, LCD isn't for chimps...it's really only useful for checking the histogram, controls can be frustrating...I don't think you should need two hands to change ISO, etc.
It's about as far from a P&S as you can get...it's a professional tool that you have to learn how to use. But, if you do your part it will deliver in spades. Canon pulled out all the stops on this camera, and it shows.
This is an argument that will go around and around...it's really a personal choice based on what you need from your camera. For me, the 1Ds fit the bill...for you it may or may not.
mfisnc wrote:
I do mainly landscape, portrait or macro or architecture
I want a reliable camera with very good quality in details
In general I think the 5D makes more sense for what you are doing...
...unless it is in the rain.
I haven't used the 1Ds, but I've been considering it as a backup to my current wedding setup of 5D & 30D with 1D2 backup for weather. To me it makes sense since it can at least share batteries with my 1D2.
So aside from the weather sealing and battery compatibility for me, I think the 5D makes much more sense from an image quality standpoint. Not for the extra megapixels, but the high ISO and D.R.
