Archive 2004 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

ballyhoo33
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

I've put a mere 2178 actuations on my 1D2 in the three weeks I've owned it and have ordered more large prints from this camera than I did with my D30 that went through tens of thousands of actuations over a 2 year stretch. I can comfortably print a 13x19 or 16x20 from the 1D2 knowing I won't be sacrificing the quality of the print for size. I'm very comfortable with the 1D2 and what it's capable of shooting and I think that reflects in the images I print...and I've only printed landscapes and macro shots...haven't taken the 1D2 to it's full potential.

Jeff

Jul 02, 2004 at 08:28 AM

ericchan
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

In my opinion, the 300D's limitations are in its feature set, build quality, etc. and not in its image quality, which is first-rate. When you shell out the extra $$$ for the 1D Mark II, what you're paying for is a combination of technical features: higher resolution, low noise at high ISO, faster autofocus, high burst rate, etc., and also a number of operational features, such as superb build quality and battery life, fast write speeds, the ability to write to a card while holding the shutter down, etc.

I've been using a 300D since last December and have recently had the opportunity to try the Mark II for about a week. For me, the most notable differences are in handling and operation (e.g. responsiveness), and those are the things that impressed me the most. Whether or not it's worth the extra money is a personal decision of whether those differences matter to you.

Jul 02, 2004 at 10:07 AM

Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

Bruce Connelly wrote:
I hear you Tony on the ETTL issue and Keith on the 1.3X both of these are great points and after all I have the 16-35 and a 550 EX and at last I'd be happy with the combo becuase I'd stop using FEL and would'nt see those mushy 16mm edges.
I guess the real issue is I'm getting frustrated with Canon. I love my EOS 3, its everything a Camera should be. The 1D2 is good but the weight, old battery design and curious menu's really do upset me. What I want is the control layout, weight and battery...Show more →

Bruce,

First, to address your battery question. The actual battery life on the Mark II is truly exceptional. It's a big battery, but it is good for at least 2000 shots or more (I took 2200 on my first charge, with a lot of LCD usage, and the battery still was not dead.. I had to deplete, refresh, and recharge it).

That said, I WOULD like to see this camera in a smaller footprint. More specifically, I would like to see the portrait grip be an optional add-on, rather than an integral part of the body. That makes the camera seem way too large. Of course, part of the reason Canon does this is to accommodate the battery. But there is also another reason; based on surveys Canon conducted, the overwhelming majority of potential buyers for 1-series cameras buy the portrait grip anyway. I was a little skeptical about this at first, as I wondered how so many people could actually prefer a more ponderous camera body, but the prevailing opinion in this forum is that the portrait grip is an essential 'pro' feature. There are Nikon D70 users that are contemplating upgrades purely because they 'need' the damn portrait grip, and the D70 does not have one. I can't say I understand this line of thinking, but trends are trends and it seems both Nikon and Canon are following them in their pro bodies. And unless the Olympus system really takes off, I seriously doubt we will see smaller and lighter pro bodies from Canon or Nikon, since so many pros and advanced amateurs seem to prefer having a cinder block hanging around their neck. Those small bodies will be in the consumer segment and ship with all of the attendant limits that the heavier, larger pro-bodies don't have. We may see an 'EOS 3 digital,' but I am not sure. I think that perhaps the 1D Mark II WAS the EOS 3D, and now we will see a bevy of less capable products filling the gaps between the Digital Rebel and the 1D II. Of course, one thing we may have to look forward to is the fact that those intermediate bodies may act as incubators and testing platforms for new Canon technologies, just as the EOS3 was for the 45 point AF.

Arka C.

Jul 02, 2004 at 01:43 PM

Bruce Connelly
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

Arka,

I'm not disputing the life in the 1D2 battery just the technology level. the machine could be smaller and lighter with one of the newer technologys, why not use them? Also I have real issues with a PRO camera featuring USB 1.1.

I'd like to point out that I have sold my 1V and kept the EOS 3s. The three was more than the prototype, its a far better camera in so many ways. Firstly it has the 4.5fps speed WITHOUT a huge battery pack and I could never find a single bit of AF difference. Also the EOS 3 survived several desert sand storms here that put most of my USM Zooms out of action and Australian fine red sand makes Death Valley look lake a vacation spot so the strength agruement went out the window for the 1V.

Neither the EOA 3 nor any of the PRO Canons feature the pop up flash and I really find this little tool very useful as you can get just enough fill without the need to lug a 550EX all the time.

But don't you find it ironical that a holiday camera I purchased for my wife is livings its life behind L series primes in a studio simply becuase of its weight and good quality when RAW?

Finally I've done more than a few printing jobs for D70 users now and you a right they all want to change to Canon. The D70 images are the best I have ever seen from a Nikon and they are SHARPER than the 10D at everything other than 100ISO RAW but don't you think its sad that Nikons cheapest is also by far their best? If you buy a D70 what can you upgrade to in Nikon, at least with Canon we can debate the pros and cons of 1D2.

Bruce

Jul 04, 2004 at 07:08 AM

Kyle Yates
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

Like everything else if it does the job then it's worth the money. If what you already have works fine then keep using that.

I've had shots with the MK II that my D60 would either have missed or I wouldn't even have attempted to THINK about trying.

If you are a pro you have to work out -- how much does a missed shot costs you -- not only in direct cost but also reputation etc.

In the current state of the market the 1D MK II is a real bargain -- don't forget people were paying huge sums for those large DCS cameras only 2 or 3 years ago which are today nothing more than heavy doorstops.

The 1D MK II can be had for around 4200 EUR / 4400 USD which was LESS than a new 1D MK I sold for.

If you are a well heeled amateur then like everything else it depends on how much you are willing to spend on your hobby.

In 5 years time we'll probably be saying -- Did I really spend that amount on the 1D MK II when the next system comes out but in today's market unless you need the extra resolution of the 1Ds this camera is as far as 35 MM DSLR's are concerned is the ONLY show in town.

Nikon will probably come out with something soon as there are a few pros who are getting itchy feet. The D70 is not really a "serious pro" camera although IMO it's very good.

The 10D and 300D also are by the same token not really suited to the rough and tumble world of Photo Journalism either but some pros are using these successfully in limited areas.

Whether something is worth 3, 5, or any amount more than another product depends essentially on the valuation of the person using it .

Nobody -- but NOBODY I know thinks that the MK II is a waste of money. Some of my colleagues are waiting for their 2nd bodies already.

The USB 1.1 is a non issue as well as this is ONLY used for direct / pictbridge printing. For normal computer connection the camera uses firewire. You could argue that USB 2.2 might have been a more sensible choice but Firewire is fine and unlike USB you can daisy chain firewure devices if you have several such as hard disks etc.

As to the weight issue -- you'll soon find it actually balances better than the 10D / 300D and you won't really notice it too much. Pro equipment has to be rugged -- which means unfortunately more weight.

If you are still satisfied with film just wait this generation of cameras out and buy the next model or the one after that.

Once you've put a decent Lens on the MK II and fired off a few shots in really difficult circumstances you'll wonder how you ever did without it.

I used to hate having to "Push" film or waste 1/2 a roll because I needed something faster. Just being able to change the ISO on the fly is so much better. In my Film days I often carried 2 or 3 Bodies with different film in them.

I never had the 1D MK I but I can certainly say that for my 35 MM needs the 1D MK II fulfils around 90%. For the other times I use the 1Ds and the odd film shots when I need IR.

Jul 04, 2004 at 08:04 AM

rjk55425
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

As much as I'd like to have one, for me, its not. I never imagined myself using a 1D either, but the introduction of the 1D Mk2 made it possible so you never know, maybe some day.

At the same time, these cameras are optimized for different purposes. Trying to use the Rebel for high demanding situations will be frustrating, using the Mk2 for P+S is really overkill. A good compromise for me was to move from the 10D to the 1D and pick up the Rebel for casual purposes.

Jul 04, 2004 at 11:08 AM

uz2work
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · 1D2 v's 300D is it really worth 4.5 times as much?

rjk55425 wrote:
At the same time, these cameras are optimized for different purposes. Trying to use the Rebel for high demanding situations will be frustrating, using the Mk2 for P+S is really overkill. A good compromise for me was to move from the 10D to the 1D and pick up the Rebel for casual purposes.

Not only is the 1DII (and the 1D, for that matter) overkill as a P and S, I would argue that someone who has only P and S skills would get inferior results with the
1DII compared to the 300D. With the 1DII, unless the user has enough knowledge of exposure to at least use the aperture priority or shutter priority
modes, he/she is better off with a 300D.
That is also why I believe that the 10D is an excellent camera for someone who has some knowledge and is trying to grow his/her knowledge and skills.
It has the various program modes for someone who is just learning about
exposure, and it also has a wider range of manual controls than the 300D for someone to be able to use after he/she has developed more skill and
knowledge.
Les

Jul 04, 2004 at 11:20 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end