only 4mp, only 8 fps, banding terribly at ISO1600


1.

I dunno, looks pretty good all things considered. There was a time not too long ago that this was "the" digital.

Terrible AF, I see no BIF

^^^ Seriously, no ducks or cats? Come back when you have some of those! Haha jk jk. Lovely shots.

I agree, these are terrible shots.

Unless, of course, you subject was autumn leaves in which case you did a pretty good job.

It took Canon 8 years to bring 8 frames per second to a 7d. Will we wait another 8 years for 10 frames per second?

I think your photos would be nicer if:

1. The 1D battery lasted longer than a few hundred shots
2. The 1D LCD was bigger
3. (Obviously) The 1D had more MPs for cropping
4. The 1D took memory cards greater than 2GB.

#11 takes the cake..

The nice thing is he didn't have to go through the trouble of resizing those shots to upload them

IN_Credible shots by the way. And isn't that what we are all after ?

RobDickinson wrote:
Terrible AF, I see no BIF

Well, to be fair, he did shoot Leaves in Flight (LIF). That does qualify, doesn't it?

Seriously though, I love the pictures! Haven't gotten any good foliage shots myself so far.

Antje

I just thought he'd missed the bird..

Great pics, see the upscaling didnt hurt them1!

I found the banding, image 3, bottom 5th

I miss the look of the 1D.
Love them.
Honestly the 1D is possibly one of the best, if not THE BEST tracking focussing systems created by Canon.
Hopefully the new model will live up to its little brothers reputation.

Needs more duck.

Thanks for sharing the fall colors.

Thoughtful captures.

Too bad you don't know how to use those old cameras!!

Agreed .. it is obsolete. Still useful for small prints or websized display when the light is good and you can keep the ISO below 400.

2001 was a great year for cameras!

I still prefer the look of 1D images over any subsequent Canon DSLR. Maybe I'm just being nostalgic because I got my first National Geographic credit from a 1D shot, interpolated up to 48mb (equivalent to about 17 megapixels).

EltonTeng wrote:
I think your photos would be nicer if:

1. The 1D battery lasted longer than a few hundred shots
2. The 1D LCD was bigger
3. (Obviously) The 1D had more MPs for cropping
4. The 1D took memory cards greater than 2GB.


5. The 1D was FF.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Yakim Peled wrote:
EltonTeng wrote:
I think your photos would be nicer if:

1. The 1D battery lasted longer than a few hundred shots
2. The 1D LCD was bigger
3. (Obviously) The 1D had more MPs for cropping
4. The 1D took memory cards greater than 2GB.


5. The 1D was FF.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.


At least by NOT being FF, it was the one camera that made the EF 17-35 f2.8L look good...

EltonTeng wrote:
I think your photos would be nicer if:

1. The 1D battery lasted longer than a few hundred shots
2. The 1D LCD was bigger
3. (Obviously) The 1D had more MPs for cropping
4. The 1D took memory cards greater than 2GB.


At 4mp and battery life of a couple hundred shots do you really need support for cards larger than 2GB?

Nice shots, although scenery isn't really "my thing", it shows the old girl still is still very capable.

Nice shots, although scenery isn't really "my thing", it shows the old girl still is still very capable.

Agreed. Good thing you have that killer AF. Those trees can be pretty quick sometimes

What lens did you use on #10 ? F stop?

Here's a ISO 1600 shot from the 1D. I did not apply any noise reduction, so you can see how bad the noise is straight from the camera

EltonTeng wrote:
I think your photos would be nicer if:

1. The 1D battery lasted longer than a few hundred shots
2. The 1D LCD was bigger
3. (Obviously) The 1D had more MPs for cropping
4. The 1D took memory cards greater than 2GB.


When you look at 1d's IQ, none of above seems to be a problem for me.

Image quality is what counts after all.










.

OceanView wrote:
What lens did you use on #10 ? F stop?




The falling leaves were shot with the 400f5.6L at ISO1600.
The rest were shot with a Zeiss 85mm f1.4 ZF, stop down to f2-f5.6
The original files are very sharp, I don't know why flickr would eat away the details so much.

xjsq, your shots are fantastic. I bet you could take equally excellent shots with a PS or pinhole camera,