Well, its a new year and new things to deal with. I'm very happy with my D300 (sorry, I'm not trying to start anything but it is relevant) but I'm shooting for the yearbook and they're all Canon.

I have the following lenses: 24-70 2.8, 24-105 4 IS, 70-200 2.8 IS and several other "lesser" lenses, BUT the best body available is a 40d and there is only one or two to go around (20+ shooters), the rest of the bodies are Rebels.

For that reason, I'm thinking of selling my D300 and spending all the money on a body because lenses are available.

My thoughts:
1d Mark 2 - I hate the little LCD, but everything else checks out. A little old, but whatever.
5D - The king, I would scoop it up if not for the fact that a lot of what I'll be shooting is sports, indoor and outdoor and I'm just not sure if its up to the task.
50d - Looks good on paper, doesn't exist. Not a pro body.
1ds Mark 1 - Its a 1dinasour, but from what I've seen a lovely camera.

Other suggestions are happily taken. My max would be $2000 if necessary. This is out of pocket but I'll be using it for personal use too so I don't mind the price.

1DMkII - a fantastic machine and sure, the LCD is small but it's not a deal breaker. For sports, at that price point, it's your clear choice.

Edited by PierreB on Sep 03, 2008 at 09:44 AM GMT

The 1D Mark IIN has a 2.5" LCD (much better) as an option?

That's kind of what I was thinking. The 1.3 crop factor is a nice compromise and they can be had on the cheap. Megapixels really don't matter because its all going to be little prints. I figure I can put it on my Op/tech strap and it won't be too much more neck stress. I'm reading through the 5d II rumor thread now, any chance it'll be $2000?

David Tognazzi wrote:
The 1D Mark IIN has a 2.5" LCD (much better) as an option?

From what I've seen, it sells for around $2500 on the B/S here. That's too much

Well, its a new year and new things to deal with.

I didn't know Nikonians have another calendar (or did you mean the Nikon Fiscal year ) , but anyway: happy New Year!

Oh man this is gonna be so nice for you. The real EOSfun is around the corner.

Well from what you say the 50D seems to be the best choice to me, but you'll have to have some patience until it's available. If you can't wait, the 1DmkII is sooooo fine. You'll get used to that LCD you hate and forgive the camera it's not up to the latest the greatest, for it is really the photomachine for sports. If you can live with the 8mp GO FOR IT. It'll even take away upgraditis for longer than you'd expect given the age of this classic gun! Welcome aboard and have EOSfun!

School year, that is.

I've actually had a foot in both camps for some time because I shot for the school (but not for the yearbook) with a 30d last year. I've had the D300 as my personal camera because I love everything about it but my guess is that the vulnerable 1d can match it.

The 50d sounds nice, but like I said, its a dream right now. My first shoot is this Friday, although I may have to use the D300 or a loaner body for that.

new year starts in 4 month. wait another 2 weeks if you can. And buy a 5D II.
or an old 5D.

Taylor Barrett wrote:
my guess is that the vulnerable 1d can match it.

Vulnerable? The AF problems aren't THAT bad

I have an idea-get a 5D, and if you need to shoot sports, trade it for a day for one of the 40Ds, or in a pinch, the 5D can shoot sports just fine. The frame rate is a little slow, but some good timing can make up for it. The pixel density is the same as the mark 2, so you will not be losing reach.

stanj wrote:
Taylor Barrett wrote:
my guess is that the vulnerable 1d can match it.

Vulnerable? The AF problems aren't THAT bad

That's what I get for always going #1 on the built in spell check

From what I hear, the AF is supoib (imagine an Italian accent).

I like the 5d but I've heard the AF is slow and 3fps is not enough.

By far the best camera in your price range for the application you mentioned is the 1dm2. The new 5d will absolutely be more than $2000, and the only knock on the m2 is the lcd. I don't chimp very much, but the screen is plenty big enough to check composition and the histogram.

Taylor Barrett wrote:
From what I hear, the AF is supoib (imagine an Italian accent).

That is not an Italian accent... it's a Jersey ('Joisey') accent.

Taylor Barrett wrote:
That's kind of what I was thinking. The 1.3 crop factor is a nice compromise and they can be had on the cheap. Megapixels really don't matter because its all going to be little prints. I figure I can put it on my Op/tech strap and it won't be too much more neck stress. I'm reading through the 5d II rumor thread now, any chance it'll be $2000?

David Tognazzi wrote:
The 1D Mark IIN has a 2.5" LCD (much better) as an option?

From what I've seen, it sells for around $2500 on the B/S here. That's too much

Taylor,

I picked up a used (about 140K actuations) but still in very good shape MKIIN from a person here on FM for a bit over $1800. I'd played around with the MK II and found the improvements and additions to the N well worth the extra money. It's a whole lot of camera and I really like the images I get with it particularly when I'm using a good lens. I think the whole 1D/1Ds series do "stress" lenses.

If you watch the buy/sell forum's you'll see IIN fairly often for around the 2K mark.

Robert

Daytime or nighttime sports?

If daytime sports, you could bottom feed a 5D and a "bargain" condition 1D classic together for less than $2,000.

The 1D is a very capable machine, the files are very nice (and sharp) and it has 1/500th flash synch. It' doesn't look that great above ISO 800 IMO (especially compared to the mkII/IIN). It eats batteries - but they are all over the place for $500 and less.

I shot hockey, ice skating, and gymnastics with the 40D, and it's a solid performer. Still, I'd be hard pressed to give up the superior auto-focus on the 1DII and go back. The camera itself doesn't capture better images, but it makes it a lot easier to capture more keepers.

Mark Peters wrote:
Daytime or nighttime sports?

If daytime sports, you could bottom feed a 5D and a "bargain" condition 1D classic together for less than $2,000.

The 1D is a very capable machine, the files are very nice (and sharp) and it has 1/500th flash synch. It' doesn't look that great above ISO 800 IMO (especially compared to the mkII/IIN). It eats batteries - but they are all over the place for $500 and less.


I agree with Mark. You already seem to like the 5D, but it doesn't do everything you want. The 5D/1D classic combo would be the best of both worlds and you would still be at your $2000 price point. I have seen used prices 1D classic go from anywhere from $500+ and the 5D from $1300+.

I recently sold a 1DMKII and that is the other option I would recommend if you are looking for a one camera solution. I loved that camera and sold it because I wanted the better high ISO capabilities of the 1DMKIII....Buying both the 1D Classic and the 5D would give you both the High ISO capablities of the 1DMKIII (with the 5D) and the speed (with the 1D classic).

Lots of good responses here. I would love to pick up a 40d and call it a day, but frankly nothing about that camera impresses me... so I also hesitate about the 50d. I liked my 30d but the D300 is clearly better in my opinion.

I'm now up between 5d alone, 5d+1d classic or 1d2. I'm just going to make a list of merits and decide.

Anyone in Seattle want to lend me a 5d for an afternoon so I can test the speed?

eosfun wrote:
Well, its a new year and new things to deal with.

I didn't know Nikonians have another calendar (or did you mean the Nikon Fiscal year ) , but anyway: happy New Year!

Oh man this is gonna be so nice for you. The real EOSfun is around the corner.

Well from what you say the 50D seems to be the best choice to me, but you'll have to have some patience until it's available. If you can't wait, the 1DmkII is sooooo fine. You'll get used to that LCD you hate and forgive the camera it's not up to the latest the greatest, for it is really the photomachine for sports. If you can live with the 8mp GO FOR IT. It'll even take away upgraditis for longer than you'd expect given the age of this classic gun! Welcome aboard and have EOSfun!


too funny!~

Taylor Barrett wrote:
Well, its a new year and new things to deal with. I'm very happy with my D300 (sorry, I'm not trying to start anything but it is relevant) but I'm shooting for the yearbook and they're all Canon.

I have the following lenses: 24-70 2.8, 24-105 4 IS, 70-200 2.8 IS and several other "lesser" lenses, BUT the best body available is a 40d and there is only one or two to go around (20+ shooters), the rest of the bodies are Rebels.

For that reason, I'm thinking of selling my D300 and spending all the money on a body because lenses are available.

My thoughts:
1d Mark 2 - I hate the little LCD, but everything else checks out. A little old, but whatever.
5D - The king, I would scoop it up if not for the fact that a lot of what I'll be shooting is sports, indoor and outdoor and I'm just not sure if its up to the task.
50d - Looks good on paper, doesn't exist. Not a pro body.
1ds Mark 1 - Its a 1dinasour, but from what I've seen a lovely camera.

Other suggestions are happily taken. My max would be $2000 if necessary. This is out of pocket but I'll be using it for personal use too so I don't mind the price.

Why get rid of the D300? What other Nikon lenses to you own?

Why not invest in some sharp Nikkor zooms such as the VR 70-200?

Color accuracy or image quality differences between Canon and Nikon shouldn't be an issue for a yearbook.

Much success,

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo

1D MkII.

And that is coming from someone who really loves his 5D.

leewoolery wrote:
Why get rid of the D300? What other Nikon lenses to you own?

Why not invest in some sharp Nikkor zooms such as the VR 70-200?

Color accuracy or image quality differences between Canon and Nikon shouldn't be an issue for a yearbook.

Much success,

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo


I am getting a Canon body because I have 24x7 access to $10,000 in lenses... pretty much every L-series lens. Why would I get a 70-200 VR for $1700 when I could have the 70-200 2.8 IS, the 300 2.8 IS and the 400 2.8 for free?

I'm pretty much sold on the 1d mark 2, now to find one.

I'm kinda surprised you didn't like the 40D? It's a lot of camera for the money, and it is a nice upgrade over the 20/30D. I think you should try one and give it chance, it's a pretty good one camera solution. It may be cheap enough (used) that you could keep your D300?

Scott T wrote:
I'm kinda surprised you didn't like the 40D? It's a lot of camera for the money, and it is a nice upgrade over the 20/30D. I think you should try one and give it chance, it's a pretty good one camera solution. It may be cheap enough (used) that you could keep your D300?



It is cheap enough that I might keep both but I've been using it all week (the 40d we already have) and it has left me incredibly unimpressed. Used mostly with the 24-105 f/4 IS and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and I'm getting dull, blurry images... I suspect the 24-105 has a front focusing problem but still. I would love to like it, I really liked the 30d but for some reason the files just are very unappealing. Shooting JPG only, yes I know the cardinal sin but that's how we do it. Sharpening at the halfway mark, saturation up 1 and the rest left at default on the standard color mode.

I'll see if I can download some of the pics I've demonstrated, but I'm almost 100% sure its not technique because frankly I'm getting better pics with the original Rebels (not even xt ).

Taylor Barrett wrote:
... Shooting JPG only, yes I know the cardinal sin but that's how we do it. Sharpening at the halfway mark, saturation up 1 and the rest left at default on the standard color mode.

I'll see if I can download some of the pics I've demonstrated, but I'm almost 100% sure its not technique because frankly I'm getting better pics with the original Rebels (not even xt ).

that's one of the strengths of the 40d to me, the jpg's from the camera are great. I shot a lot of jpg + raw on a recent trip, the jpegs were good enough I didn't need to post process the raw files. May be an issue with the camera? Have you tried one of the Canon picture styles?

A lot of critical (perhaps hyper critical ) photographers are very pleased with the IQ from the 40D.

Yes, which is why I was so shocked. I can't imagine how a newer camera, that is extremely well liked, could be worse than its older predecessor. I may try to get my hands on another 40d to see if somethings amiss. Still, the call of the 1D is strong