Am I being thick, or am I missing something very obvious...
What is the main difference between these two cameras?
I see the different sized LCD on the two, the "n" having the larger of the two. I also see the "n" has a bigger maximum burst i nboth Jpeg or RAW, but it is minimal.
Unless I am missing something, the II looks better than the IIn as far as value is concerned. Am I missing something?
I am thinking about upgrading from a gripped 30D to one of these bodies. Thoughts?
I am sitting here staring at the Canon Library and feature wise, it doesn't seem like much. Like I said, I must be being thick, because I can't seem to find it.
I ran into this question myself, and found the II a better deal than the IIn.
From what I gathered the main differences were the bigger screen on the n, the n having the ability to write raw on one card and jpeg to the other.
Here are some I also just googled, that too seem minor to me (not enough to warrant a $600+ premium in my opinion.)
* ISO sensitivity can now be adjusted while looking through the viewfinder
* Low-level formatting of SD memory cards
* One-Touch magnification of AF point to almost pixel-equivalent size
* Magnified image quality improved
* New Ec-S focusing screen
* Accelerated startup now 0.2 seconds
* Shutter lag is now 55ms
* Enhanced PictBridge
I ran into this question myself, and found the II a better deal than the IIn.
From what I gathered the main differences were the bigger screen on the n, the n having the ability to write raw on one card and jpeg to the other.
Here are some I also just googled, that too seem minor to me (not enough to warrant a $600+ premium in my opinion.)
* ISO sensitivity can now be adjusted while looking through the viewfinder
* Low-level formatting of SD memory cards
* One-Touch magnification of AF point to almost pixel-equivalent size
* Magnified image quality improved
* New Ec-S focusing screen
* Accelerated startup now 0.2 seconds
* Shutter lag is now 55ms
* Enhanced PictBridge ...Show more →
That is the info I have been looking for. It seems like the upgrade from the II to the "n" was a bit like the upgrade from the 20D to the 30D
Mike is right IMHO. I went through this and I went with the II. You can kind of tell that the difference wasn't that great so the name change was only adding the "N." I didn't think the extra $600 or so was worth it for me and my amateur uses.
Without getting to involved the bottom line is- If you shoot more raw and don't care about 2 cards go with the Mk2. But if you shoot more JPG's or would like to do JPG's on one card & raw on the other then you should get the "N". Also (IMO) if you shoot primary JPG's you MUST get the N. The differnce in the processing parameters using the new "picture styles" makes the JPG's much better in the newer N. You might see some post regarding the idea that the N has better AF than the Mk2, but that is false. What these people are really seeing is much sharper JPG's due to the newer processing (more in camera sharpening)
Since you are looking for a used body, I would buy the one with fewer actuations at a better price. Your best buy would probably be with a low shutter count 2 over the 2N.
Paul ( I have a 1D2 and love it )
www.melor.com for pictures from that camera.
While the 2 cameras arent a whole lot different, what I have found that I loved about my 1DMKIIn over the 1DMKII was this. Better noise control at 1600 and 3200. I loved the bigger screen. and the zoom to focus. I also liked that I could shoot Raw+jpg and have them on different cards. IMHO it was worth the extra $500 to me when I sold my 1DMKII and bought the 1DMKIIn. But now that I have the 1DMKIII all bets are off. I'm liking the 1 series even more now.
Matt OHarver wrote:
While the 2 cameras arent a whole lot different, what I have found that I loved about my 1DMKIIn over the 1DMKII was this. Better noise control at 1600 and 3200. I loved the bigger screen. and the zoom to focus. I also liked that I could shoot Raw+jpg and have them on different cards. IMHO it was worth the extra $500 to me when I sold my 1DMKII and bought the 1DMKIIn. But now that I have the 1DMKIII all bets are off. I'm liking the 1 series even more now.
Matt
Well said. If I were in the used market considering a 1D2 v 1D2N, for the small difference in price I would go with the N, purely for the bigger buffer actually, I always felt the 1D2 was like a fast Mercedes, very quick until you get to 155mph. The car has more to give but it is limited. Also, since the N is the more recent model I would also feel more confident that it will hold its value better than the 1D2. Just my 2p worth.
The MKIIn was released to fix AF issues with the MKII that Canon admitted they could not fix.
Now where have we heard this before? Maybe the issue is only finally sorted with the MK3 fix, who knows?
For those who suffered from the MKII AF issues the MK3 AF issues would make one feel right at home. Canon released firmware that abated, but did not fix the issues but even more quickly than the MK3 fix, had the MKIIn on the market.
The MKIIn could occasionally exhibit some AF foibles ~ so they had not fully resolved their fundamental AF problem, but the success ratio was high enough that these issues never gained notoriety.
The MKII should be satisfactory enough for all arenas except for affected machines, high speed, variable speed, close proximity and irregular tracking activities ~ ie soccer from the endlines with players attacking [your] goal ~
Nov 10, 2007 at 05:10 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
gbee wrote:
The MKIIn was released to fix AF issues with the MKII that Canon admitted they could not fix.
Now where have we heard this before? Maybe the issue is only finally sorted with the MK3 fix, who knows?
For those who suffered from the MKII AF issues the MK3 AF issues would make one feel right at home. Canon released firmware that abated, but did not fix the issues but even more quickly than the MK3 fix, had the MKIIn on the market.
The MKIIn could occasionally exhibit some AF foibles ~ so they had not fully resolved their fundamental AF problem, but the success ratio was high enough that these issues never gained notoriety.
The MKII should be satisfactory enough for all arenas except for affected machines, high speed, variable speed, close proximity and irregular tracking activities ~ ie soccer from the endlines with players attacking [your] goal ~ ...Show more →
The mkII N was not relased because the mkII had AF issues
Forgot to mention there is no MK3 AF issues either ... And Santa Claus is real and the Tooth Fairy really buys kids' teeth ....
Tomorrow I'm buying a big bottle of wine, as it's my day off and you guys might give me the prescription for those rose coloured glasses yous are wearing.
SeanH wrote:
Without getting to involved the bottom line is- If you shoot more raw and don't care about 2 cards go with the Mk2. But if you shoot more JPG's or would like to do JPG's on one card & raw on the other then you should get the "N". Also (IMO) if you shoot primary JPG's you MUST get the N. The differnce in the processing parameters using the new "picture styles" makes the JPG's much better in the newer N. You might see some post regarding the idea that the N has better AF than the Mk2, but that is false. What these people are really seeing is much sharper JPG's due to the newer processing (more in camera sharpening)...Show more →
Well said...Absolutely agree with SeanH
Nov 10, 2007 at 09:29 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
gbee wrote:
Forgot to mention there is no MK3 AF issues either ... And Santa Claus is real and the Tooth Fairy really buys kids' teeth ....
Tomorrow I'm buying a big bottle of wine, as it's my day off and you guys might give me the prescription for those rose coloured glasses yous are wearing.
Funny guys, thanks for the laugh.
And what has the MK3 AF issues to do with this MK2 & MK2 N comparison
In every thread for the last months you have tried to steer the discussion in to the MK3 AF issues, whatever the thread is about
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
There isn't any press release or proof, that's why he can't show any link
And it's not the truth..the 1DmkII didn't have any AF issue
I hope not...I just bought one last night
Thank you all for the information in this thread. It made the choice to go with the mkII much easier.
