Can't decide between the two. I do dance, festivals, tea ceremony, house parties, etc. I live in Japan right now. I have seen 5D Mk II's on Amazon.co.jp go for as low as $2300 US brand new, 1D MkIII's for the usual 4000 new.
I like my 30D size and weight (have had it for 1.5 years now) but have been really wanting FF ever since I got a used EOS 1-N. Plus all the other goodies that either camera offers.
Money will not be an issue. Purely one of handling. Weight and size for superior AF, handling, and structural integrity? Or 30D sized 5D Mk II with 21 MP, nice LCD, and FF (I'm ok with 1.3, just hate my 20mm going to 35mm and my 28mm going to 45mm on a crop body)? Please give me your experiences, especially in regards to whether the size of the 1D made you feel reluctant to bring it to small events/small parties/a friend's house/etc. because you didn't want to be bothered lugging around the whole shebang.
Brian, No offence but your post contains the answer to your question: "have been really wanting FF ever since .." So, don't be surprised if folk overwhelmingly suggest you get the 5D! Wish fulfillment anyone?
I own both a 5D (MKI) and a 1DIII and since picking up the 1DIII the 5D has hardly been touched. Basing your decision on event photography, specifically the dance part, I'd say the better choice is the MKIII due solely to AF superiority and handling. There is a big difference when shooting with a 1-series in comparison to a 5D/xxD weight/size wise, specifically if the latter were not gripped, so this is something you need to figure out for yourself--perhaps even consider keeping your 30D as a back-up and for occasions you want to pack light for. As for the whole FF thing, try not to get too hung up on it...believe it or not there are more important things than sensor size sometimes
Thanks for the replies everyone. Yeah I look at the 5D Mk II every time I take my film in to get developed...it's calling my name...
It's not really the IQ part that bothers me as much as not having a real wide lens. I would probably use my 28-70 2.8 alot more if it really started from 28mm, not 45 like on my 30D. Right now I'm forced to use my 20-35 2.8L all the time and the distortion is running me ragged at 20mm (32mm on the crop).
Also, after giving it some thought, I would probably be served better by getting the 5D2 and another prime lens, like the 85 1.8 or the 135 f2 rather than throwing all my money into the 1D body. I don't see the 5D2 AF being any WORSE than my 30D, which has given me great results. Anyone have any experience with that?
That's what I figured, big country, nice to get reassurance on it. Thanks!
And thanks to everyone else. I've decided to go the 5D II route, and use my 30D as a backup or when I want to take at 5 fps like sports and stuff.
What about cropping on the 5D II, how do images come out if you crop down heavily to say half of the 21 mp image, like roughly a 10 or 11 mp sized image?
big country wrote:
if you need the high ISO go for the 5D II. the autofocus is as good as if not better than a 30D.
Is 2/3-1 stop in high ISO performance worth it over a superior AF system though? The difference between the two camera's at high ISO's pales against the difference in AF. Obviously the answer to this question is subjective and likely differs from user to user, but it's something the OP should consider. Both perform excellently at high ISO's, only one performs exceedingly well in the AF department.
I switched from a 1D2/1Ds2 to a pair of 5Ds three years ago for event and editorial work, and haven't looked back; currently shooting a pair of 5D2s. sRAW1 (10Mp) is perfect for event work and really adds to the flexibility of this camera.
For me the main reason to go with the 5-series is full frame compatability with prime lenses and compact handling. But if you are happy with the 2.8 zooms (which I think are great lenses), the 1D3 is excellent. I could shoot virtually all of my work with that body and just two lenses (16-35 and 70-200).
I don't have a problem with the 5D2 AF. You just have to know its limitations: center AF point is great in all light; outer AF points only in good light. AI-Servo is surprisingly good. (Oh, and I shoot almost *only* candids.)
Well, there are those times when that stop or so makes a huge difference. I did a dance recital last month, and that stop did prove crucial. I started with the 1d2 and 135/2 at ISO 3200, and exposing "correctly" so that the noise wouldn't kill the shot, I had too slow of a shutter speed (first shot). Then I went to the 5d and underexposed by a stop, pushed it, and managed to get a stop-action shot. Both images had the same NR, and remember the 5d is underexposed: http://www.goprices.net/fm/blurred.jpg http://www.goprices.net/fm/clear.jpg
big country wrote:
i think the 5d2 is better than 2/3 - to 1 stop. but what do i know. i just use either my 1d III or 5d 2 depending on the circumstance.
OK, from what I've seen in real world prints it looks to be only 2/3-1 stop, give or take, better ranging from 400-3200. I'd love to see samples that can prove otherwise...honestly. Still, there is a larger gap in AF performance than there is in high ISO performance.
both cameras are suitable for all types of event photography. i think what you choose as a lens would affect the overall image quality more. 5D and 1DIII are all capable cameras, if you can afford the 1DIII with higher frame rate and better AF then go for it. if not then focus your money instead on glass and flash system.
The AF is not as bad as they make it sound