p.2 #1 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
jerrykur wrote:
Sorry Stan,
I think you need to send your 5D back.
I test this several times immediately before I posted it. The 1DMK2 hunts and the 5DMK2 locks, same lenses, same tripod, same dim room. I tested with a Canon 24-105 f4L, Tamron 28-75, and Canon 50 1.4. In all cases the results were the same.
jerry
+1
I just tested my 1dsmk3 vs my 5D2 with 24-105 in a dim room, both cameras couldn`t lock onto a subject using the off centre AF points (where I thought they might) they both locked on with the centre point at the same amount of time. When shooting sunsets with either camera as the light gets dim they both require me to aim the camera at a cloud edge or similar to achieve focus. I`m honestly not seeing any massive difference between the two cameras (other than trying to hold up the weight for a long time:-)
Just another quick point!
Whats this massive long blackout that has been spoken of Maybe I need a nano meter staring into a dark tunnel Stan !!! and the sound effects!!!
I haven`t got my old 5D now but from memory this 5d2 is heads and shoulders over the mk1 in so many ways. As I`ve stated before "you won`t be able to bang nails in with the 5D2" but I honestly haven`t come across any reasons why not to carry the 5D2 yet.
p.2 #3 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
This thread is full of all the crazily advanced photographers with the multiple 1 series cameras and the 5D's, whilst mere mortals like me can only dream
p.2 #5 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
dave chilvers wrote:
I just tested my 1dsmk3 vs my 5D2 with 24-105 in a dim room, both cameras couldn`t lock onto a subject using the off centre AF points (where I thought they might) they both locked on with the centre point at the same amount of time
Ok, maybe it's because I would never think of using a 24-105 in a dimly lit room. Try any f1.2 or 1.4 lens, which is more what one would be using in pathetic light. At least that's what I use, and that's what I am comparing.
p.2 #6 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
What is the point of all this? Who cares if the D700 and the 1Ds3 series share the same sensitivity and that the 5D2 is marginally behind? If -0.5 makes a world of a difference to any of you, why even consider the 5D2? Quite obviously, from a marketing standpoint, the 5D and 5D2 are huge success stories and the 1Ds3 bodies cannot come anywhere close to the popular demand of these 2 bodies - or the D700 for that matter. So those of you who argue for the 1Ds3, don't even bother to look at the 5D Mk II, as it is apparently clear it's not the camera for you. One other point - do people seriously expect a body costing less than half the price to be every bit as good as the more expensive one? What idiot would then buy a body costing more than twice the price if everything is exactly the same?
p.2 #7 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
The 1DsIII does a lot better in low light than the 1DsII did. When I got the 1DsIII, I remember testing it out in my dim living room at night. It was able to lock onto subjects that I knew the 1DsII would not be able to. My late 1DsII did a lot better than the 5D did in these same situations. Since the 5D and 5DII have essentially the same AF system, that should put things in perspective. The 5D and 5DII are great cameras, but the AF just isn't as good in low light. For the record, all of my examples in the low light situations were done with fast primes.
p.2 #8 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
But the 5D and 5D Mk II are NOT the same. Improvements have been made to the 5DII to increase it's AF sensitivity and accuracy although the numbers don't suggest that.
Ben Horne wrote:
The 1DsIII does a lot better in low light than the 1DsII did. My 1DsII did a lot better than the 5D did. Since the 5D and 5DII have essentially the same AF system, that should put things in perspective.
p.2 #9 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
bobbytan wrote:
But the 5D and 5D Mk II are NOT the same. Improvements have been made to the 5DII to increase it's AF sensitivity and accuracy.
There have been improvements, but nothing major. It seems to be some minor tweaks to a similar system. The low light improvement between the 1DsII and 1DsIII was huge. I was blown away by it when I saw what the 1DsIII was able to do. I don't think anyone can argue that the difference between the 5D and the 5DII is equally huge.
p.2 #10 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
Ben Horne wrote:
There have been improvements, but nothing major. It seems to be some minor tweaks to a similar system. The low light improvement between the 1DsII and 1DsIII was huge. I was blown away by it when I saw what the 1DsIII was able to do. I don't think anyone can argue that the difference between the 5D and the 5DII is equally huge.
Ben
Well I`m not seeing any huge difference, I`ll admit I`m landscape and grab type but if you look at all the 5Dmk1 users that have been happy(and still are) and use the 5d for pro work then taking the upgrade of the 5D2`s it will become equally as popular as far as I can see.
It has opened up the world of stock work for me without the need to lug the weight around. OK, I`m not getting any younger but I`m by no means a wimp and it has extended my enjoyment and ease from which I can walk the beaches and paths. I remember just how enjoyable it was to roam around Paris with my 20D and get back to the hotel ready for a cuppa but not knackered.
I own the 1 series cameras, I have no axe to grind because they are superb cameras but for my work I have not been hampered one little bit using the 5D2 which turns out to be very good value compared to my 1 series cameras. the icing on the cake for me is that every one of my MF lenses work just as well as on the 1dsmk3.
I`ll be the first in line to complain to Canon if they tried to pass off a dummy. What I want is some WA lenses from Canon that keep the AF and IS and give results like Contax and Leica.
I don`t think I`m gonna bring myself to sell my mint 1dsmk3 but I`m selling my 1dsmk1 and maybe even my 1dsmk2 to finance my credit card bill.
p.2 #11 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
OP here, back to the original post:-) I'm hearing from this thread that the 1dsmkIII is a big improvement over the 1dsmk2 AND I'm hearing that the 5D2 and 1dsMKIII show little difference when tested with a 24-105.
StanJ, did you get to try them in similar scenarios with f 2.8 or better lenses? Most of my glass is L series 2.8 zoom. And yes, please test center point. I'm just old school that way. Maybe I'll break out of my shell one day and allow the camera to do more.
In short though it does sound like the 1dsmkIII is the way to go, even though the sensitivities are only .5 difference I doubt the processing speed is the same and that makes a huge difference in focus lock time.
p.2 #13 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
Scott Campbell wrote:
StanJ, did you get to try them in similar scenarios with f 2.8 or better lenses? Most of my glass is L series 2.8 zoom. And yes, please test center point. I'm just old school that way. Maybe I'll break out of my shell one day and allow the camera to do more.
Well as I posted earlier (somewhere buried now), all I shoot in bad light is 1.2 and 1.4 primes, with very few exceptions. There, the 1Ds3 buries the 5D2 in terms of AF, both speed, accuracy, and repeatability. I use all AF points, but that doesn't change much in terms of difference: the 1Ds3 center is better than the 5D2 center, and the 1Ds3 outer are better than 5D2 outer. Not to mention that the 1Ds(X) outer points are _so much_ better arranged than the non-1D outer points... but you don't care about that
p.2 #14 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
Scott Campbell wrote:
Hi all,
After reading the reviews on both of these cameras IQ and features are a wash for me. Meaning that price for value I should go with the 5D MKII.
HOWEVER, I'm a 1DS MKII user since it came out. To pay the bills I shoot mostly weddings and events. Most of wich are in low light ballrooms and at dusk outdoors (Palm Springs resorts).
My shoot and focus style is center point with auto expand on. So essentially focus and reframe.
As you can imagine fast focus and nailing the shot immediately is critical to the success to the money making side of my business.
So my question is: based on my shooting conditions, style and focus style will the 1Ds mkIII be significantly better than the 5D mkII?
Yes, it's worth it to me to pay 2X-3X just for better AF.
Lastly, I do enough studio, portrait and architecture work that I need full frame.
I won`t go on about low light focus because it`s obviously very close but I went out early this morning to the coast for sunrise and shooting both cameras the results I got I could have used either camera and wouldn`t tell the results apart. Yes it would be nice to have the same amount and spacing of the AF points as the mk3 has but the 5D2 has launched at almost 1/3rd the mk3 price. We know that Canon could easily match both cameras in a heartbeat (now that the chip is the same) but that`s not how business works.
Out of Interest, 4hrs in minus temps and the battery gauge didn`t move.(with chimping etc.
p.2 #15 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
I'm in this exact situation. I've shot with several 5D's since the week it was released. I shoot about 175,000 frames a year.. While i LOVE the shots when they are accurate, my main gripe is that at ~f2.0 my in focus percentage is ~25%. I'm fairly convinced that the 1DsMK3 is my next set of bodies.. I do have 1 question for those who own both the 5DmkII
Question? Regarding high ISO, is the JPG diference at iso's above 1600 HUGE between 5d2 and 1Ds3... i.e. can I use the 1Ds3 at iso 3200 etc?
I might get one of each and use the 5d2 for receptions and other low light challenges if the diference is that dramatic. ALSO keep in mind. I only need prints of about 8x12 as anything larger is not the norm,
p.2 #16 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
The AF in the 1dsmkIII is better than the 5dmkII but unless your shooting an action shot it's not that relevant if you have a flash on it I took a pic of my cat and I could barley see her but the camera and flash focused oh her real quick.
p.2 #17 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
It is just amazing how much these bodies depreciate.. 1DsMKii's that sold for 8k are going for 2500 (about 70% drop) just a lil over 1 year after it was replaced
p.2 #18 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
Using these cameras in wedding venues nearly every weekend...I can honestly say the 5D2 is more than enough. Sure I love the 1D.. but rarely if ever do I feel that I am missing anything due to using the 5D2.
Not saying there aren't many reasons to use the 1D... Just saying for portrait and, in particular, weddings/receptions...I find the 5D2 incredibly accurate and very capable. Never feel inadequate using it...I would venture to say that a good majority of your top level wedding photogs are using 5D's and now 5D2's.. And no, I don't have documentation to back that up...just been in the biz long enough to know what my peers are using predominately.
Last weekend I left my 1D at home. We are currently using (3) 5D2's for all of our wedding work. Oh and we shoot the same way... Typically, focus and recompose with expansion on. The 5D2 AI-Servo seems to be working decently for us as well...However, in the wedding environment, I rarely use servo...Even processional and recessional, a quick one-shot technique works fine. Center point locks fast and consistently in lower light (albeit, using flash and flash assist light)
p.2 #19 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
kawter2 wrote:
I'm in this exact situation. I've shot with several 5D's since the week it was released. I shoot about 175,000 frames a year.. While i LOVE the shots when they are accurate, my main gripe is that at ~f2.0 my in focus percentage is ~25%. I'm fairly convinced that the 1DsMK3 is my next set of bodies.. I do have 1 question for those who own both the 5DmkII
Question? Regarding high ISO, is the JPG diference at iso's above 1600 HUGE between 5d2 and 1Ds3... i.e. can I use the 1Ds3 at iso 3200 etc?
I might get one of each and use the 5d2 for receptions and other low light challenges if the diference is that dramatic. ALSO keep in mind. I only need prints of about 8x12 as anything larger is not the norm, ...Show more →
5D2 and 1Ds3 high ISO performance is virtually identical.
p.2 #20 · 1Ds mkIII VS 5D mkII Low light, center point focus
Regarding wedding photography, last I spoke with him, Joe Buissink uses 5d's. I'm sure he's going to mark 2's, but haven't spoken with him since they came out. It's rare to see 1Ds2 or 1Ds3 in high end wedding photography in LA. 1D2 and 1D3 are very common, as are the 5d/mark II. However, I did get to shoot a buddy's 1D2 at a wedding and it was horrible in low light with f/2.8 glass (WITH the focus assist from the flash). My 5d's do just fine in that regard. My keeper ratio with 1.2/1.4 glass is pretty amazing with my 5d. Could it be better? I'm sure, but 3 5d2 bodies for $9k vs. 3 1Ds3 bodies for $19k is quite a big difference, especially considering the other costs we must deal with. That, and the weight of a 1 series is just a killer after 8 hours of shooting.
Maybe I need a nano meter 
staring into a dark tunnel Stan !!! and the sound effects!!!