Re-read his original post, paying close attention to everything, but especially to the sentence he put in boldface type.
He's talking about the 1Ds, not the 1Ds2. He only mentioned the 1Ds2 as it pertains to a previous discussion on another thread, and how it got him thinking about the 1Ds instead.
I owned the 1Ds once and aside from image quality, I just didnt care for it. The battery life was horrible, the screen was borderline unusable (tiny with no zoom), and the write speed was so slow it was just unacceptable for anything except inanimate objects.
Shooting a wedding with it was just excruciating. Granted image quality was very good, and built quality was top notch, but the electronics were disappointing.
The ultimate answer to this question is "it depends". If all you do is shoot inanimate objects (product, landscapes) at low ISO, then the 1Ds is probably the better camera. If you are looking for a better general purpose, all around camera then the 5D is the hands down winner. It can do low ISO, high ISO, products, landscapes, weddings, parties, and basically anything you throw at it. With the 1Ds you have to be very deliberate and very patient.
deepbluejh wrote:
If all you do is shoot inanimate objects (product, landscapes) at low ISO, then the 1Ds is probably the better camera.
I still tend to doubt that conclusion even within the subject matter limitations you're referring to.
The 5D delivers slightly higher resolution across the frame (12.7 vs. 11.1 MP) and better noise characteristics per pixel. I've only shot with a borrowed 1Ds once, and it wasn't side-by-side with a 5D, but nothing about the resultant files jumped out at me as being superior to those produced by the 5D. At low ISO, I'd guess it was (practically speaking) a wash.
stanj wrote:
Why do people keep saying the 1Ds didn't have LCD zoom? Does nobody read the manual?
Probably because most of the people alleging that have never held the 1Ds in their own hands.
David Israel wrote:
So, please....which camera would you choose?
This question comes up very, very often. I've owned and used both at the same time and now only own the 5D. The reason is simple: overall, it's the better of the two cameras from the standpoints of IQ and consistency from shot to shot. Secondarily, it's the better of the two cameras in terms of battery life, LCD and other features that others here have well-noted.
There's nothing like the 1-series build, of course, and from that viewpoint the 5D is certainly the lesser of the two. But I have yet to suffer any negative consequences from the 5D's less substantial build nor have I heard anyone else suffer anything as a result of the 5D's build. The fact is, if you take care of ANY camera and handle ANY camera with care, it will serve you well and last a long, long time.
Now, there's no question that the 1Ds Mark 1 files (up to ISO 640) have a certain look about them that many photographers cherish and consider unique. I concur. The files are rich and deep and seem to emulate film in a rather special way. That's why I held onto my 1Ds for so long and used it often simultaneously with my 5D. But, after a time, I reasoned that the uniqueness of the files didn't make up for the camera's shortcomings and older technology. I also learned how to post-process my 5D files to achieve the same look, if I wanted it.
Bottom line: the 1Ds is an excellent camera with limitations. The 5D is a better camera.
skid00skid00 wrote:
And a full-width slice from one image:
that's impressive (and it took me few minutes to find the "quote" button all the way to the right..)
I don't know who invented this high ISO myth (if it was some 20D sunday shooter all excited to get a full frame camera for 3K by then or -and most likely- the canon people at the marketing department): fact is that when you have a camera delivering "unique" pictures won't be easy to adjust to another one taking "non unique" pictures with some sort of neat image built in advising others to do the same because .. well just because ..
markle wrote:
I don't know who invented this high ISO myth (if it was some 20D sunday shooter all excited to get a full frame camera for 3K by then or -and most likely- the canon people at the marketing department
You will hardly find a bigger fan of the 1Ds than me. I'd still pick it over a 5D. But the high ISO myth is not a myth, it's a fact. skid00skid00 has posted a nice 1250 ISO image with little noise, and I am sure I could have done the same back in the days. The problem is, and be honest - how often do you go outside on a bright and almost sunny day and set the camera to ISO 1250? Personally, I never do that, except by accident, and then I am not particularly happy, even with my current 1Ds3.
You use high ISO usually when there's not all that much light. One such example is indoors, or evenings outside, or a combination thereof. Under these circumstances you _usually_ have very high contrast - there's the lamp in the corner, people sitting nearby, and the deep shadows by the table and in the opposite corner. This is your typical ISO 1250 situation. Now go back, shoot a properly exposed picture of the scene with the 1Ds, and post it, and we'll talk.
Again, I *loved* my 1Ds, shot 60k frames before selling it; I have right of first refusal with its current owner, as I'd re-purchase it from him if he decided to part with it. I have probably shot my best photos with this camera. But when I look at pictures above 400, I cringe.
stanj wrote:
You will hardly find a bigger fan of the 1Ds than me. I'd still pick it over a 5D. But the high ISO myth is not a myth, it's a fact. skid00skid00 has posted a nice 1250 ISO image with little noise, and I am sure I could have done the same back in the days. The problem is, and be honest - how often do you go outside on a bright and almost sunny day and set the camera to ISO 1250? Personally, I never do that, except by accident, and then I am not particularly happy, even with my current 1Ds3.
You use high ISO usually when there's not all that much light. One such example is indoors, or evenings outside, or a combination thereof. Under these circumstances you _usually_ have very high contrast - there's the lamp in the corner, people sitting nearby, and the deep shadows by the table and in the opposite corner. This is your typical ISO 1250 situation. Now go back, shoot a properly exposed picture of the scene with the 1Ds, and post it, and we'll talk.
Again, I *loved* my 1Ds, shot 60k frames before selling it; I have right of first refusal with its current owner, as I'd re-purchase it from him if he decided to part with it. I have probably shot my best photos with this camera. But when I look at pictures above 400, I cringe....Show more →
facts? I have few myself
the 1Ds classic goes up to 1250
now if I shoot the same scene with the two cameras I get almost a stop difference. Meaning that the 1Ds metering is more conservative.
Now if I open up the same stop (over like the 5D does) then I get a brighter file. Of course
Now I apply a little of USM the 5D file "breaks" immediately. The 1Ds file doesn't brake but still strongly delivering all the details. Now the fun part: when I apply neat image to both I get a better and cleaner picture from the 1Ds. And that after I took away all the magentas from the 5D file to make it decent. (and at the same time I also take away some cyan from the 1Ds file, to be honest) BTW to the 5D owners please set the WB shift to B2,G2 in order to get real colors and not ":fiction" colors, including the magenta that makes all the faces look like dolls.
At 800 ISO the difference is again in favor of the 1Ds.
I insist, it's a myth. and lots of cheerleaders behind the scenes.
the 1Ds Mark II does the same thing. (including the "pumped" metering past 800ISO, like the 5D and 30D and 40D and all the new soldiers from the noise moneymaking battle).
tricks and facts. In the end the 1Ds gets my admiration against both the 5D and the 1Ds Mark II (which at least gives more "real" resolution, and that's the only reason why I bought one.)
until now the only camera that impressed me was the AAless kodak 14n, right after that there is the 1Ds, still unmatched (looking at the pictures it takes).
that's my opinion, of course. (and I shoot at 800ISO/2.8 in regular basis, with a 1Ds classic and II)
.
markle wrote:
facts? I have few myself
the 1Ds classic goes up to 1250
now if I shoot the same scene with the two cameras I get almost a stop difference. Meaning that the 1Ds metering is more conservative.
Now if I open up the same stop (over like the 5D does) then I get a brighter file. Of course
Now I apply a little of USM the 5D file "breaks" immediately. The 1Ds file doesn't brake but still strongly delivering all the details. Now the fun part: when I apply neat image to both I get a better and cleaner picture from the 1Ds. And that after I took away all the magentas from the 5D file to make it decent. (and at the same time I also take away some cyan from the 1Ds file, to be honest) BTW to the 5D owners please set the WB shift to B2,G2 in order to get real colors and not ":fiction" colors, including the magenta that makes all the faces look like dolls.
At 800 ISO the difference is again in favor of the 1Ds.
I insist, it's a myth. and lots of cheerleaders behind the scenes.
the 1Ds Mark II does the same thing. (including the "pumped" metering past 800ISO, like the 5D and 30D and 40D and all the new soldiers from the noise moneymaking battle).
tricks and facts. In the end the 1Ds gets my admiration against both the 5D and the 1Ds Mark II (which at least gives more "real" resolution, and that's the only reason why I bought one.)
until now the only camera that impressed me was the AAless kodak 14n, right after that there is the 1Ds, still unmatched (looking at the pictures it takes).
that's my opinion, of course. (and I shoot at 800ISO/2.8 in regular basis, with a 1Ds classic and II)
.
markle wrote:
now if I shoot the same scene with the two cameras I get almost a stop difference. Meaning that the 1Ds metering is more conservative.
One of the two cameras is metering incorrectly.
Now if I open up the same stop (over like the 5D does) then I get a brighter file. Of course
Now I apply a little of USM the 5D file "breaks" immediately.
Not sure what you mean by "breaks," but whatever it is, there's something wrong with your 5D. 5D files take mild USM quite well, with no detrimental effect.
The 1Ds file doesn't brake but still strongly delivering all the details.
The 5D delivers the same (or slightly better) detail, in part due to its mild AA filter and in part due to the overall quality of the sensor. Detail is preserved quite well with the 5D, especially at high ISO where the relative lack of noise means fewer details are obscured by non-image data.
Now the fun part: when I apply neat image to both I get a better and cleaner picture from the 1Ds. And that after I took away all the magentas from the 5D file to make it decent. (and at the same time I also take away some cyan from the 1Ds file, to be honest)
Again, I can only suggest that something's wrong with your 5D. Chroma noise in the shadows is a problem for any digital camera used at high ISO, but the 5D's chroma noise is about the least offensive I have seen, and is not strongly magenta-tinted.
BTW to the 5D owners please set the WB shift to B2,G2 in order to get real colors and not ":fiction" colors, including the magenta that makes all the faces look like dolls.
No need, at least on my 5D. (Noticing a theme here?)
At 800 ISO the difference is again in favor of the 1Ds.
Not even close. The 5D at ISO 800 is so clean that I don't even really consider ISO 800 a "high" ISO with that camera.
I insist, it's a myth. and lots of cheerleaders behind the scenes.
If we're "cheerleaders," it's because it truly is a great camera at high ISO. No myth. Get your 5D checked.
moondigger wrote:
The 5D at ISO 800 is so clean that I don't even really consider ISO 800 a "high" ISO with that camera.
Seems the 1Ds vs. 5D debate will never end.
It's quite true that ISO 800 on the 5D is like ISO 200 on so many other cameras. I shoot interiors professionally and often find myself in situations where I need to shoot handheld detail shots under somewhat dim conditions.
Rather than set up my lights and other gadgets, I go to ISO 1600 and f/2.8 or f/4 and shoot away. My photo editors have not once complained, nor is there any trace of noise in the final published images, not even when tightly cropped and blown up to double-page spreads.
Most recently I completed a series on Kid's Rooms. Several of the shots had the children included. In order to stop action and gain shutter speed (kids age 8 to 13 don't sit still EVER), I shot at ISO 1600. One of the shots was cropped to about a 6MP size and was used for the cover of the magazine, a mag about 10" x 15" in size. Technically, it was as good a portrait shot you'll ever see on a magazine cover and was clean, clean, clean.
I could not have done this with my 1Ds nor any other DSLR I've owned in the past. It's one of the 5D's great capabilities. If Nikon has caught up with their D300 and D3, kudos to them. It's an attribute that never existed in the film days (low noise at very high ISO), one that has become critically important in today's digital climate ... I think mainly because the capability for clean, available-light shooting under a variety of conditions is very, very desirable.
moondigger wrote:
One of the two cameras is metering incorrectly.
yes, the 5D and 1DsII and 30D and 40D are incorrect approaching 800ISO and up.
Not sure what you mean by "breaks,"
it means what it says (exactly): after all you understood very well (methinks), and yet playing :"dumb" for not understanding when you indeed do understand. If you continue with this "dumbness" of yours you're not going too far with me
The 5D delivers the same (or slightly better) detail
no, it doesn't
(B2,G2): No need, at least on my 5D. (Noticing a theme here?)
yes the theme is that you like to play "dumb". 5D, 20D,30D,40D all give a magenta cast.
(800ISO) Not even close.
the 1Ds is better at 800ISO. Much better. like the 1DsII as a matter of fact. The 1DsII uses "tricks" only past 800ISO.
note: to be sure: are we talking about raw, right? because jpegs on the 5D past 800ISO are such a joke. It looks like painting the scene with a brush. L O L
veroman wrote:
(...) interiors no lighting consumer gear high ISO play (...)
set a 1Ds at 1,000 ISO, expose to the right, then apply a gentle neat image and the result will be stunning,
the only problem with the noise stays in the shadows. expose to the right (like the 5D and 1DsII do automatically).
after all it also takes a photographer to make it happen, not just the camera.
the last time I did interiors we had some 15 lights in place. do you really shoot professionally at 1,600ISO with a 5D with no lighting at all?
