Someone has offered to sell me a 1DSMK2 for a good price. I am wondering if the 1DsMK2 is that much of a "upgrade" from my 5D. I do shoot in high ISO (1600 or 3200) a bit and I already have a 1DMK2 (I use it for sports and wildlife). Most of my shots are landscape, travel, and street. Any thoughts?
Someone has offered to sell me a 1DSMK2 for a good price. I am wondering if the 1DsMK2 is that much of a "upgrade" from my 5D. I do shoot in high ISO (1600 or 3200) a bit and I already have a 1DMK2 (I use it for sports and wildlife). Most of my shots are landscape, travel, and street. Any thoughts?
jerry
The 1Ds II has better IQ. I don't think the high ISO shots are quite as good noisewise but they're still pretty darn good. The AF on the 1Ds II is superior and the build of course is heads above the 5D. It's not a body I liked carrying around all day though, and I can carry a 5D all day no problem.
I have had both and just bought another 1DSMK2. I will say that I never noticed a big difference in the IQ so I do not think that should be the theory for movin' on up (ala George Jefferson) but I prefer the build feel and controls of the 1 Series camera hence my decision. It is interesting that you can get a low click one now for about $3500 and the 5D was $3200 new. Of course it is $1500 used on B/S now...
John Power wrote:
I have had both and just bought another 1DSMK2. I will say that I never noticed a big difference in the IQ so I do not think that should be the theory for movin' on up (ala George Jefferson) but I prefer the build feel and controls of the 1 Series camera hence my decision. It is interesting that you can get a low click one now for about $3500 and the 5D was $3200 new. Of course it is $1500 used on B/S now...
Thanks for the replies. I may just sit tight for now and see what the 5DMK2, 3D, 7D, or whatever it is called provides. This one is about $3300 with 52,000 actuations with a relatively recent shutter replacement. I still have the 1dMK2 for those time when I want a faster camera (shutter and AF), or I need to hammer in some nails.
well i have both.
had the 5d for sometime and purchased a 1ds2 back in sept.
if you plan on shooting weddings with the 1ds2, id say reconsider it.
1. the files are overkill
2. the camera is too heavy, especially with the RRS L plate
3. the 1ds2 is not great in low light, 5d is much faster
4. lcd is so tiny, hard to see in bright light
otherwise, for portraits, the 1ds2 is much better.
if you can only have one, just ask yourself what you plan on shooting.
choiboyogg wrote:
well i have both.
had the 5d for sometime and purchased a 1ds2 back in sept.
if you plan on shooting weddings with the 1ds2, id say reconsider it.
1. the files are overkill
2. the camera is too heavy, especially with the RRS L plate
3. the 1ds2 is not great in low light, 5d is much faster
4. lcd is so tiny, hard to see in bright light
otherwise, for portraits, the 1ds2 is much better.
if you can only have one, just ask yourself what you plan on shooting.
can be an upgrade, can be a downgrade
I guess that's why so many accomplished and highly skilled professional photographers use the 1DSMK2.
What's a good price?! The 5D might be slightly better at 3200 noise-wise but the 1Ds2 is very good at 1600 and excellent below. As has been shown in many a test, it also has about a stop more dynamic range than the 5D. Combined with the far superior AF and handling, this all makes it a big step up IMO. However, it is also a much heavier body.
You're probably wise to wait... unless you want a pro body, whatever replaces the 5D will be cheaper than a 1Ds2 and probably have as good, if not better, IQ.
pipspeak wrote:
What's a good price?! The 5D might be slightly better at 3200 noise-wise but the 1Ds2 is very good at 1600 and excellent below. As has been shown in many a test, it also has about a stop more dynamic range than the 5D. Combined with the far superior AF and handling, this all makes it a big step up IMO. However, it is also a much heavier body.
You're probably wise to wait... unless you want a pro body, whatever replaces the 5D will be cheaper than a 1Ds2 and probably have as good, if not better, IQ.
+ 1, 1Ds series is totally different league to compare - i found out three years ago when trying 1d2 since then i can't go back but keep moving up
The Mk3 is too troublesome to comment on, the 5D files are nice but I dispute that its actually better than the 1DsII. Out of all my pictures its the ones taken with the 1DsII that show the most flexibility in terms of denoising and other processing
I guess that's why so many accomplished and highly skilled professional photographers use the 1DSMK2.
hey, i never said that it wasnt a fantastic camera or that ACCOMPLISHED OR HIGHLY SKILLED pro photograpers didnt use it.
you act like that the 1ds2 is the perfect camera and it just isnt.
you cant tell me that the 1ds2 is better in low light than the 5d.
thats why when i commented, i asked him what he plans on shooting.
the 1ds2 is not the end all of SLRs. it is an old camera and has its limitations
btw, pros do use other cameras.... sheesh, just cause its a 1DS2 doesnt mean that you are automatically pro staus.... and by your comment, i guess pros dont use anything else but 1ds cameras?
choiboyogg wrote:
hey, i never said that it wasnt a fantastic camera or that ACCOMPLISHED OR HIGHLY SKILLED pro photograpers didnt use it.
you act like that the 1ds2 is the perfect camera and it just isnt.
you cant tell me that the 1ds2 is better in low light than the 5d.
thats why when i commented, i asked him what he plans on shooting.
the 1ds2 is not the end all of SLRs. it is an old camera and has its limitations
btw, pros do use other cameras.... sheesh, just cause its a 1DS2 doesnt mean that you are automatically pro staus.... and by your comment, i guess pros dont use anything else but 1ds cameras?...Show more →
I disagree - beside the IQ, 1ds2 keeper rate is ten times better than 5D for sure
Yes Andrew "its an old camera". You drew a lot of rather angry and argumentative conclusions from a poster who had the audacity to dispute your opinion. I am not "acting" like anything, I am not "telling" you anything and no camera is the "end all" of anything.
It would be interesting for someone to do a a study on front cover photos of various magazines taken with DSLRs and compare the number taken with a 1DSMK2 vis a vis the number taken with a 5D. Wonder which camera would win that competition. The 5D I am sure...Gee. Why does Canon even bother with the full frame DSLR series when the 5D is a better camera. Oh I know. Because so many people shoot in the rain and need to get their weightlifting workout.
I have had both cameras and each has their strong points.
choiboyogg wrote:
you cant tell me that the 1ds2 is better in low light than the 5d.
Atcually I know what I would rather use at ISO 1600. The thing is that the noise is a 1DsII file is not as destructive as that in a 5D, it cleans up better. I used think the same about the 5D beung better and wondered why I got the 1DsII but the more I used it, the more I realised how good a camera it is.
In answer to the original question, I don't think that either camera is necessarily better than the other one. Both cameras are tried and tested -both have stood the test of time remarkably well. I'd be happy with either. The quality and pros and cons of either camera can be debated all day long and not reach a useful conclusion. Evaluate whether your current kit works for you - if it does, why change? If it doesn't - consider your alternatives.
Regarding the Mk2 being an old camera - so is the 5D. Doesn't stop either of them being good though.
I currently own: 1DIII, 1DsII, 5D, 30D.... at least for DSLRs
1DsII vs the 5D:
IQ: 1DsII wins by a little bit. Its not earth shaking. A little more DR if shot in RAW. I find the rendering a little more intangibly "film-like." The extra res is only a slight thing. High ISO wise there's a bit more noise but also a bit more detail. I consider it a wash there.
AF: 1DsII is much better on its cross-types, but I've actually found the outer-points less reliable than the 5D's outer points in mediocre to poor light. This was an issue for me when I was using fast primes (IE 85L) in low light and did not want to focus-recompose. The center points are certainly amazing, though.
Build/Handling: Build goes to the 1D hands down. Handling, I actually prefer the joystick AF point selection and the through-the-vf ISO selection of the 5D. I absolutely love my MKIII as the best of all worlds in this arena. The smaller VF on the 1DsII is also a noticeable drawback for me.
For wedding use, I objectively prefer the 5D when I have the ability to reach for either camera. I simply get better results with my 85L and 35L in low light with it. If I was more of a zoom-user (and not so apt to go quite so shallow) I might skew more towards the Ds. For portrait/studio use, the Ds is the clear winner.
choiboyogg wrote:
you cant tell me that the 1ds2 is better in low light than the 5d.
Maybe I can't tell you, or rather, maybe you won't believe me, but I'll do it anyway.
Low light AF: 1Ds2 wins hands down without even breaking a sweat.
Noise: per-pixel noise: 5D wins. Given that both have the same crop factor (none), you can always frame the image the same way. The 1Ds2 has considerably more pixels, and it has been shown before that _overall_ noise (per pixel multiplied by number of pixels) is the same on the 1Ds2. So for pixel peeping, yes the 5D wins. For looking at the picture at the same size, on screen or print, the game is even.
^stan, in my experience, which i have had two 1ds2's, given low light situations, the 1ds2 hunts quite a bit. it takes it considerably longer to hit a focus than the 5d with the same lens in the given conditions.
maybe its just the 2 cameras that i had but from what i was able to tell, 5d wins in this hands down.
my original post states that each camera has its strength and weakness. i never said that the 1ds2 was an inferior camera.
yes, it has better AF IQ given enough light, yes the 1ds2 has better resolution and build, etc...
John Power wrote:
Yes Andrew "its an old camera". You drew a lot of rather angry and argumentative conclusions from a poster who had the audacity to dispute your opinion. I am not "acting" like anything, I am not "telling" you anything and no camera is the "end all" of anything.
It would be interesting for someone to do a a study on front cover photos of various magazines taken with DSLRs and compare the number taken with a 1DSMK2 vis a vis the number taken with a 5D. Wonder which camera would win that competition. The 5D I am sure...Gee. Why does Canon even bother with the full frame DSLR series when the 5D is a better camera. Oh I know. Because so many people shoot in the rain and need to get their weightlifting workout.
I have had both cameras and each has their strong points. ...Show more →
sorry john, seriously when i wrote that post, i just got back from the OC fair and it was like 3am. i had a lot of fried food and i was very tired.
i really didnt mean to come off as angry but when i read it this morning, i guess it did.
Having had most canon DSLR`s and still have quite a few I have stated on other threads that taking everything into consideration the 1dsmk2 is the best compromise of all of them (don`t forget taking everything into condsideration) and that includes the 1dsmk3.
