can you please give your opinion. I am trying to decide on getting either a 1d ll or a 5D. they are about the same price. i have a 30D that i am thinking I could use for wildlife... birds etc. and use a 5D for FF stuff like landscapes portraits etc. Now i am thinking that maybe i should get a 1D ll. Would it help give me better results in the wildlife and events photography than the 30D? and I could still use it for landscapes etc.or is the 5D a superior camera in that it is FF and newer. so the ques. is do i get a 5D and my 30D or would a 1D ll improve my situation even more? your comments would be appreciated.
Philip
I would get the 5D for landscapes and events and use your 30D for wildlife. The 1.6 crop benefits you greatly when you need that extra reach for wildlife photos.
Well, I think it kinda depends on which one you shoot more of.
5D hands down for landscape and portrait. The 1D is pretty much amazing for anything that moves. I acquired mine recently and I'm finding that I trust the AF more than I did with the 40D. The 30D is the prosumer camera in the middle, it has the 1.6 crop that benefits wildlife as mentioned and takes decent pictures. You can arrange your set up in several variations depending on which one of what you shoot makes the money and how important the Image Quality is to your photos.
You can also consider the 40D, which isn't quite your 1D mark 2 but only at a little over half the cost.
For 50/50 sports/landscape and portraits. Best would probably be 1D 2 with a 5D.
More landscape and portraits, 5d with 30D (or a 40D is a nice little upgrade and the prices are quite stellar these days)
More sports, 1D 2 with 30D/40D.
If you want, you can buy either of these cameras used and sell it if you find that you don't like it without losing hardly anything. Try it in a real shooting situation and see if you like the set up. After all, we can only learn about these cameras from what others have to say.
The 1Dmkll or mklln produce shots that are pretty much identical in IQ to those from a 20D or 30D so take that into consideration since you won't be able to see any difference IF the AF was equal under the shooting conditions. 1 series AF is without a doubt BETTER, but that's not always necessary when upgrading unless you feel your AF isn't doing the job the way you shoot. I don't generally shoot high ISO enough to really make recommendations in that area, and am happy with the results from all of them when I do since I learned shooting film & ISO (or ASA) was terrible by my standards.
The 5D is a great camera for skin tones & texture, has a simple menu system, and is lighter than a 1 series, plus I suspect better high ISO (I never tried it in the 15 months I owned one) so if you need high ISO take that into consideration. For me the 5D was my people camera, my 1Dmklln my fast paced camera, and I was fine with that until a 1Ds2 was available locally and now my 5D is gone, but it was a very good camera with a big following.
I was using 5D as my Flagship Body Sold it and got 1D Mark IIn.
The IQ is way above the 5D, My Keeper Rate went up.
I am using 100-400 and 500 most of the time.
aznature wrote:
I was using 5D as my Flagship Body Sold it and got 1D Mark IIn.
The IQ is way above the 5D, My Keeper Rate went up.
I am using 100-400 and 500 most of the time.
You must be shooting in very good light otherwise the 5D would really show where it shines over the 1DMIIn. I shoot both and for everything other than sports, the 5D is my go to camera. For the type of photos I take, the 5D image quality is much better than the 1DMIIn.
terenceng wrote:
sell the 10-22, it won't fit on the 1d2 or 5d. I would suggust getting the 5d for FF 12mp sensor for lanscape with your 17-40.
my 10-22 fits fine on my 1D2... works from 10.5mm up, no vignette at 12.5mm onwards...
(you may void your warranty but it does indeed work if you do it right)
1. zoom it to 22m.
2. stick your finger in the rear element hole in, hook the edge of the plastic piece with your finger
3. pull the piece straight back; it's just snapped in
now the lens works fine...
1D2 = better for sports, events, low light AF, really sweet body
5D = better image quality when properly focused (that's the trick now, isn't it? ), mid-grade body
I have had both and found that there was VERY little difference in the PRINTED image from the 5D v. 1D2. All things equal as can be.
I sold my 5D and now only use 1D series except for the 50D backup.
Dan
I currently own the 1DmkII, and have loved it. However I have been really craving a FF body, and cannot afford the 1Ds. the 5D is next on my list to purchase. But now I question if the 5D would really be worth it, maybe I should just wait and get the 1DmkIII when the prices come down a little more.
Is the IQ between the 1DmkII and 5D really that close? I was under the assumption that the 5D was quite a bit better, especially at low-light & high ISO.
The IQ subject for 5D has been discussed before and the conclusion was 5D has better IQ than 1Dmk2. They're two different cameras for different purposes IMO. Get them both!
Bard wrote:
can you please give your opinion. I am trying to decide on getting either a 1d ll or a 5D. they are about the same price. i have a 30D that i am thinking I could use for wildlife... birds etc. and use a 5D for FF stuff like landscapes portraits etc. Now i am thinking that maybe i should get a 1D ll. Would it help give me better results in the wildlife and events photography than the 30D? and I could still use it for landscapes etc.or is the 5D a superior camera in that it is FF and newer. so the ques. is do i get a 5D and my 30D or would a 1D ll improve my situation even more? your comments would be appreciated.
Philip...Show more →
Both are great cameras. I had both and I can easily tell the difference in image quality. The 5D images retain more detail and have better tonality. Also, the 5D has much lower noise. My guesstimate is the 5D is 2 stops better than the 1DMK2.
The 1DMK2 excels at wildlife and sports which is the reason I got mine. In comparision, the 5D, 5DMK2, and 20D feels rather slow to react. However, you need to feed the 1dMK2 good glass. My 100-400 L is pretty slow on the 1DMK2. OK for subjects that move predictably, but too slow for quick grabs of BIF.
I'd take a mkII over the 5D any day in any circumstance unless it will ONLY be for static 1600-3200 iso-only shooting where the 5D does noticeably better.
If you are ONLY concerned with splitting the hairs of image quality at a 100% view on an LCD, then go with the 5D. However, that is assuming you can even get the shot with the 5D. I've missed some wedding shots due to the 5D slower AF and if you need to use various AF points other than the center one to track a subject, forget the 5D.
The 1DmkII runs circles around the 5D with better AF, a second memory card slot, better buffer for long bursts when needed, shorter mirror blackout when shooting and is much more resistant to bumps and dings and weather than the 5D.
If I could only have one camera, it would be the 1DmkII. The 5D would only be an accessory for wide-angle or specialty shots. Everything but the sensor size is better on the 1D.
Bmeister wrote:
I'd take a mkII over the 5D any day in any circumstance unless it will ONLY be for static 1600-3200 iso-only shooting where the 5D does noticeably better.
If you are ONLY concerned with splitting the hairs of image quality at a 100% view on an LCD, then go with the 5D. However, that is assuming you can even get the shot with the 5D. I've missed some wedding shots due to the 5D slower AF and if you need to use various AF points other than the center one to track a subject, forget the 5D.
The 1DmkII runs circles around the 5D with better AF, a second memory card slot, better buffer for long bursts when needed, shorter mirror blackout when shooting and is much more resistant to bumps and dings and weather than the 5D....Show more →
I have both the 5D and the MKIIn. In low light situations and using center point autofocus, the 5D is much more responsive than the MKIIn. I agree, the 5D is only usable with the center point focus as its outer focus points a useless.
