choiboyogg wrote:
sorry john, seriously when i wrote that post, i just got back from the OC fair and it was like 3am. i had a lot of fried food and i was very tired.
i really didnt mean to come off as angry but when i read it this morning, i guess it did.
i mean no harm.
No problem. I never take the occasional barking back and forth on here very seriously except with one individual. The only individual on FM I just do not like and I am sure the feeling is mutual. A shame ain't it...because I generally like everyone, even those who give me occasional (oft-deserved) sh----
choiboyogg wrote:
^stan, in my experience, which i have had two 1ds2's, given low light situations, the 1ds2 hunts quite a bit. it takes it considerably longer to hit a focus than the 5d with the same lens in the given conditions.
maybe its just the 2 cameras that i had but from what i was able to tell, 5d wins in this hands down.
my original post states that each camera has its strength and weakness. i never said that the 1ds2 was an inferior camera.
yes, it has better AF IQ given enough light, yes the 1ds2 has better resolution and build, etc... ...Show more →
Oh, no worries, I don't take such things personally. It's that my 5D could not touch my 1Ds2 in low light, just as the 40D can't touch the 1Ds3. I have found that hunting greatly depended on the lens used - e.g., tons of hunting with the 50/1.4 and much less with the 50/1.2. Way bigger difference than the 1/3 stop would suggest. Why? I don't know. I am just observing.
IQ is separate from AF, though. And even in bad light, if focused and exposed properly, the 1Ds2 image will be at least a match for the 5D image. Again, per pixel vs. per area noise.
And I do agree that the 1Ds2 is the best compromise, including the 1Ds3.
The 5D AF system is supposed to include a central sensor that is better for grabbing focus in significant de-focus situations. The 1Ds2 doesn't do that. The difference is irrelevant when the subject is close enough to being in focus or so far out that both cameras have to initiate a lens focus search.
I think too that some of the outer linear AF sensors on the 5D are vertical and some are horizontal. If that is so then it differs from the Ds2 in which they are all vertical (when they are not cross-types). This can affect AF performance for the better or the worse depending on the relative orientation of the edges being focused on, especially in lower light or lower contrast.
The AF computing horsepower in the 1Ds2 is better than in the 5D.
Some people have reported in the past that the 5D AF is more likely to succeed in very low light but it is also less decisive than the 1Ds2. They reported that the 1Ds2 will either work or fail but is less likely to be undecided like the 5D can be.
The size and weight of the 1Ds2 is not such a great penalty over the 5D once you add a big enough lens and monopod or tripod. With a smal lens the difference can be significant.
I have a 1Ds2 but have never used a 5D.
The 1Ds2 will put more pixels onto a duck than the 5D or 1D2 will with the same lens focal length and shooting position. It gives more cropping or framing room than the 1D2 but the same as the 5D.
According to Pondria's dynamic range database the 1Ds2 offers about one stop more of useful (clean) dynamic range in raw files than either the 5D or 1D2 --- 9 2/3 vs 8 1/3 stops. The 1Ds2 is about the best in the list. In-camera jpegs don't allow that much DR and the apparent IQ differences are smaller.
1Ds2 and 1D2 in-camera jpegs can look a bit soft but jpegs converted from raw files are sharper. It's something to do with the in-camera processing rather than the AA filter.
The pro cameras tend to do less noise reduction than other cameras but also lose less fine detail in the process. That means that dedicated external noise reduction software can produce better images but the in-camera results can look cleaner with the 5D. I prefer to keep all of the detail and clean it up later rather than have the camera discard it to make things look cleaner initially. Your preference may be affected by the number of shots you take and how much time you have for processing images.
The cameras have different size LCD screens but they are all 230k pixels and in any case they are all looking at the same 1.5k pixel highly compressed raw file thumbnails. None of them are great and none of them show you what is really in the file.
A 1Ds2, like the 1D2, is somewhat more customisable than a 5D. That could be a benefit if the possibilities appeal to you.
John Power wrote:
Your stuff is so good you could tell me an instamatic was the camera to have and I'd go buy it
!
I'm at the point of getting rid of my canon gear so I can get into a MFDB. The prices are just getting too low on that stuff not to make the jump. I just can't see a huge difference in the 1ds III to continue shooting canon. I'm stuck in the studio 24/7 anymore anyway.
At least you will say that. Many refuse to admit that the improvement was, at most, incremental. Wonder why that is.
Another question Brent. For the guy who is shooting some sports, a few birds, his kid's birthday party, a family vacation etc., etc, are the MFDBs even relevant? Aren't they really designed for commercial applications where you have to squeeze every inch of detail ,color, contrast, etc., etc out of the shoot? In other words, even if everyman has the cash, would buying into the technology even make any sense?
(This is what I like about this forum, you can ask a question to someone who really does know what he or she is doing. I always get a kick out of sitting in a bar and listening to a couple non-lawyers talk about DUI cases, what to do if stopped, the breath machine, potential penalties and so forth. Some of the stuff they say and think brings a smile to my face)
Edited by John Power on Jul 20, 2008 at 09:16 AM GMT
I'm not willing to say which camera is better, because I only have marginal experience with the 5D. The only 1D series I have really looked into was the 1D original. I thought about picking one up because of the prices, and the "1" series functions I would have added. However, the >800 ISO wasn't enough for me, and saving the money would be better suited towards a 1D2, or 5D.
I can look at images and tell if one is better at a glance, but if they are really close then I'm probably going to miss it.
I just want to point out one thing, well maybe 2 or 3.
5D used= approx 1500$ give or take.
1DsMK2 used=approx 3000-3500$ give or take.
I'm not going to say something is better, because it costs more, but for the simple fact more often than not you get what you pay for. From the looks of it, you can buy 2 5D's for the price of 1 1DsMK2. Based on this alone, I wouldn't compare a 1DsMK2 vs a 5D.
The last point, I see nearly every Canon shooting wedding photographer around here using a 5D. Some of the professionals are using 2 5D's as their main, some a 5D and a 30D (the guy who shot my wedding). In my area, I've yet to find someone using a 1D series on weddings, HOWEVER, that doesn't mean they aren't out there.
The money would have me lean towards the 1DsMK2, as a better camera.
This is the question you have to ask yourself;
Is a 1DsMK2 a 1500$+ better camera than a 5D, for what you do?
If yes, then buy it. If no, then you have your answer.
John Power wrote:
At least you will say that. Many refuse to admit that the improvement was, at most, incremental. Wonder why that is.
Another question Brent. For the guy who is shooting some sports, a few birds, his kid's birthday party, a family vacation etc., etc, are the MFDBs even relevant? Aren't they really designed for commercial applications where you have to squeeze every inch of detail ,color, contrast, etc., etc out of the shoot? In other words, even if everyman has the cash, would buying into the technology even make any sense?
(This is what I like about this forum, you can ask a question to someone who really does know what he or she is doing. I always get a kick out of sitting in a bar and listening to a couple non-lawyers talk about DUI cases, what to do if stopped, the breath machine, potential penalties and so forth. Some of the stuff they say and think brings a smile to my face)
Edited by John Power on Jul 20, 2008 at 09:16 AM GMT...Show more →
Even in the film days some people chose to lug around a hassy to there kid's b-day parties even though I don't think it makes since at all.
I demo'd the new Leaf AFI last winter. I hadn't used a MF AF camera before. All I'd had ever used was manual focus MF camera's like the RZ or pentax 67 ( oh why can't they put a sensor in that thing!!).
I was amazed at how slow they were. Very accurate, but slow. Put the ef 50 macro on your 1ds II and that is how the MF camera was. So if AF is a big feature for you, you more than likely won't be happy with a MF body.
The quality of the file was great, but it took me some time to get over the difference in AF speed and my amazement that a newly developed MF camera didn't incorporate ring type AF into their newly developed lenses. Seemed like a move that would of blown away every other MF camera on the market and made since. Even if it added more to the cost of the lens, your already paying $4K for a normal prime, so what's $4500?
A friend of mine told me a couple of years ago that he was more than happy with his 22mp back and saw no real need to upgrade any higher. He said it produced similar results to what he was used to when he shot 8x10 chrome. This guy had a whole dip & dunk e-6 process in his studio before digital to process the chromes and is a leader in the industry even speaking for Leaf. So I believe him.
I've had one experience where a larger back was necessary for a client shoot. I didn't find out until after the shoot exactly HOW much they wanted to crop into the file. Imagine taking a 4x6 inch size print out of the middle of a 20x24 inch print and wanting to blow that up to a 20x24!!
It barely made it and luckily it was a background inside some text. For that, I would of rented a 60mp back (if available then) if I knew the details before hand.
When shooting with the 85L II in lowlight situations with the center point active which body will produce a more consistant result?
1DsII or 5D.
1DsII - with f1.2, my keeper rate is 99% on the monopod/tripod and about 95% (AF in servo mode) if handheld. Here is the question i have - Is this AF worth $4K more, alone beside its huge files and other good stuffs ? to me - it is the right tool for any jobs.
mttran wrote:
1DsII - with f1.2, my keeper rate is 99% on the monopod/tripod and about 95% (AF in servo mode) if handheld. Here is the question i have - Is this AF worth $4K more, alone beside its huge files and other good stuffs ? to me - it is the right tool for any jobs.
Thank you Mttran:
I found my 1D to be more consistant than my 5D and I have a new 1DsII and 1DII on the way.
Yes, the AF is worth an extra $4K if your priority is "the shot."
Psychic1 wrote:
Thank you Mttran:
I found my 1D to be more consistant than my 5D and I have a new 1DsII and 1DII on the way.
Yes, the AF is worth an extra $4K if your priority is "the shot."
Hope this justisfies your spending. Believe me, "peace of mind" is the most valueable thing these days and 1 dseries will give you just that.
mttran wrote: Hope this justisfies your spending. Believe me, "peace of mind" is the most valueable thing these days and 1 dseries will give you just that.
Tell that to the Mk3 owners with the focus issues :P
mttran wrote:
I disagree - beside the IQ, 1ds2 keeper rate is ten times better than 5D for sure
in what circumstance is it 10x better? For what I shoot with the 5D it's keeper rate is very high, the same as my 1D II keeper rate. Maybe if you are shooting fast action I'd agree, but I'd never use my 5D for that if I had a choice.
Anyway I'd recommend a 1D II + 5D combo for about the same money as a 1Ds II.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
in what circumstance is it 10x better? For what I shoot with the 5D it's keeper rate is very high, the same as my 1D II keeper rate. Maybe if you are shooting fast action I'd agree, but I'd never use my 5D for that if I had a choice.
Anyway I'd recommend a 1D II + 5D combo for about the same money as a 1Ds II.
! 
Hope this justisfies your spending. Believe me, "peace of mind" is the most valueable thing these days and 1 dseries will give you just that.