OK...I have read lots great feedback regarding the Mark II N as my next choice for a Pro camera upgrade.

I now find myself getting back to reality and now thinking of getting a good used 1D ($700-$800 range).

My concern is with the AF speed. I shoot motocross races and the focusing needs to be spot on. Is the AF speed relativity the same for each camera?

I'm using 2.8 70-200 L and a 2.8 24-70 L Lens

I heard of a trick is to hold the + button and shutter 1/2 way to keep focusing and exposure real time to the subject. Any thoughts on that?

Thanks!!

The 1D classic is a great camera for the money, especially if you shoot in good/bright light for the most of the time (which it sounds like you do). The AF is blistering fast and moving subjects (even eradically) are no problem for the 1D.

Save your money for now and buy a good 1D. If you feel the need for higher resolution (it still makes large prints like a dream even at 4mp) or any of the other features of the Mark II you can always upgrade with minimal loss, but the 1D is still certainly a capable camera and you can't go wrong for the price!!

The 1D2(N) has a slight AF speed advantage because it has a separate computer doing nothing but AF clculations, whereas the older camera has a computer sharing AF and exposure calculations. The difference may be noticeable but it is unlikely to be huge - even the 1V was pretty quick.

Of greater concern is whether you think 4Mpx is sufficient for the combination of print size and subject that you are interested in. The 1D image files can produce stunning large prints after interpolation but 4Mpx is not 8Mpx, and so highly detailed scenes or subjects can look a bit undetailed from a 1D regardless of apparent sharpness. If you can't get close enough to fill the frame reasonably well then you'll miss the extra pixels per duck (or bike) of the 1D2N. If you never make a large print then the extra pixels are useless and may even need to be discarded.

The 1D also limits you more in terms of image quality at high ISO that you may need or want in order to get the shutter speeds up for the action shots in not so good light.


Using the * button for AF is quite common. It takes some getting used to because at first it is all too easy to not keep that button pressed when you see something exciting and grab a few shots before realising that the AF is not working. I actually use mine the other way - I let the shutter button do the AF and use * while I want to STOP the AF, because nearly always I'm happy to have AF and exposure and shutter release coincide with each other. I think it is controlled with custom function 4.

- Alan

I've used the 1D, 1D II, and 1D II N for sports shooting, a very small amount of airshow and autoracing, but never MX.

There is no practical difference in AF performance b/w them, imho, despite any technical variation. Sometimes I feel the 1D is oh-so-slightly more reliable, but I wouldn't say that too loudly here

ISO performance: about a one stop difference b/w the II's and the I.

I've done 24x36 sports posters from cropped 1D files - sold well and parents loved them. For what you're shooting, unless for agencies or others who demand the larger files, I'd say 4.1 mpx is plenty adequate.

+1 JKnight's advice.

I agree 100 percent with Mikes evaluation.

There's other considerations beyond AF speed and MP count.

The 1D absolutely eats batteries. In my experience, you will have to carry at least 2 if not 3 spares per event.

I felt my 1dmkII was a significant upgrade to my 1D, and the mkIIN an upgrade to the mkII.

The CCD files of the 1D i feel are sharper out of camera than the mkII, but the IIN is pretty close.

The noise of the 1D is significantly worse than either of the mkII's. I found 1600 unacceptable, but find 3200 usable from the II's. I think it's closer to 1 1/2 - 1/2/3 stop difference, YMMV.

The 1D has a 1/16000th min shutter speed vs. 1/8000th. Not sure how often that comes into play, but it is there. It also has a 1/500th flash sync speed, which can be quite significant if you shoot with artificial light quite a bit.

Thanks for all the great posts.

I agree the D1 eats batteries, I'll just get several!

I'm sure the 1D AF is quicker than my current XT Rebel AF.