| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/07/2009 03:31:01 AM · #1 |
| I've just been looking through EBay, and came across a Canon Mk II for way less than either a D700 or 5D II. I don't know enough about this particular model - does anyone know how it would compare to the D700 and 5DII? Also, what are the big differences between the 1DII and 1DIII? |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 04:22:18 AM · #2 |
I win!
Wait, what was the question? |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 04:29:16 AM · #3 |
Is it a 1D MkII, 1DS MkII, or 1D MkIIn?
Message edited by author 2009-04-07 04:29:49. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 05:04:18 AM · #4 |
Here is a comparison list from DPReview
Hope it helps.
One thing that the mk2 has which I hated was the fact you had to go through `finger acrobatics` to change any of the settings, most need you to hold down 2 buttons at once - a real pig when just wanting to scroll through your images. MK3 is single button operation.
Mk III v Mk II v MK IIn
Actually reading through that it doen't note the difference like the button thing above and also some menu improvements. But you can pick up some mk2 and mk2n for really good prices now though. Even the 1DS mk2 can be had for £1100 if you shop around. Sigh - how the mighty hath fallen.
Message edited by author 2009-04-07 05:07:41. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 05:46:04 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Is it a 1D MkII, 1DS MkII, or 1D MkIIn? |
Are there really so many? Wow. Its a 1D MkII N
Thanks  Simms, I now remember what it was that I didn't like about the one I tried about a year ago - my fingers were exhausted by the time I'd taken a shot on a Mk II that I borrowed. So I went for the Nikon. But I'm much more open minded about it now - it comes down to price :-) |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 07:07:33 AM · #6 |
Honestly, I think anything but the 1Ds MkII isn't going to be much of an improvement due to when they came out. The only advantages that I see for the MkIIn is a larger sensor and more WB options. The actual comparison of the sensor makes them look pretty equal. Sensor Comparison. The 1D MkIIn is No.18 and the D300 is 16. I'd venture to guess the 1D has better sealing, if wildlife/photojournalism are your thing.
Disadvantages include: Lack of Tiff support, smaller LCD, lower LCD resolution, lower picture resolution, requires flash triggering device, smaller buffer, less exposure compensation leniency, size (potential drawback, potential positive).
There are, of course, intangibles and I think that's what you want, which is fine, but getting an older body (that body came out almost exactly two years to the day before the D300) isn't going to net you a huge increase. Perhaps in that sense, it's good that they are similar. And really, the MkIIn only has minor hardware differences from the MkII, which was released 3 years prior to the D300.
Message edited by author 2009-04-07 07:31:31. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:04:17 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Honestly, I think anything but the 1Ds MkII isn't going to be much of an improvement due to when they came out. The only advantages that I see for the MkIIn is a larger sensor and more WB options. The actual comparison of the sensor makes them look pretty equal. Sensor Comparison. The 1D MkIIn is No.18 and the D300 is 16. I'd venture to guess the 1D has better sealing, if wildlife/photojournalism are your thing.
Disadvantages include: Lack of Tiff support, smaller LCD, lower LCD resolution, lower picture resolution, requires flash triggering device, smaller buffer, less exposure compensation leniency, size (potential drawback, potential positive).
There are, of course, intangibles and I think that's what you want, which is fine, but getting an older body (that body came out almost exactly two years to the day before the D300) isn't going to net you a huge increase. Perhaps in that sense, it's good that they are similar. And really, the MkIIn only has minor hardware differences from the MkII, which was released 3 years prior to the D300. |
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:14:42 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Honestly, I think anything but the 1Ds MkII isn't going to be much of an improvement due to when they came out. The only advantages that I see for the MkIIn is a larger sensor and more WB options. The actual comparison of the sensor makes them look pretty equal. Sensor Comparison. The 1D MkIIn is No.18 and the D300 is 16. I'd venture to guess the 1D has better sealing, if wildlife/photojournalism are your thing.
Disadvantages include: Lack of Tiff support, smaller LCD, lower LCD resolution, lower picture resolution, requires flash triggering device, smaller buffer, less exposure compensation leniency, size (potential drawback, potential positive).
There are, of course, intangibles and I think that's what you want, which is fine, but getting an older body (that body came out almost exactly two years to the day before the D300) isn't going to net you a huge increase. Perhaps in that sense, it's good that they are similar. And really, the MkIIn only has minor hardware differences from the MkII, which was released 3 years prior to the D300. |
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
if you're looking for full frame, then these (1DMKII and 1DMkIIn) won't fit the bill. I believe they are 1.2x crop factor sensors. The 1Ds versions were full frame. When it came out, the MkIIn was very popular with sports shooters due to it's continuous shooting speed (over 8 fps).
Message edited by author 2009-04-07 08:16:25. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:58:19 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by brownsm:
if you're looking for full frame, then these (1DMKII and 1DMkIIn) won't fit the bill. I believe they are 1.2x crop factor sensors. The 1Ds versions were full frame. When it came out, the MkIIn was very popular with sports shooters due to it's continuous shooting speed (over 8 fps). |
Exactly- that's why I was questioning the whole idea. The 1DMkII & 1DMkII are technically 1.3 crop.
In regards to that.... where does the boundary for Dx useful lenses end for crop factor? Does anybody know if it vary hugely from lens/manufacturer? |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 01:32:54 PM · #10 |
IMHO once you really spend some time with a 1 Series pro camera you won't want to hold another camera. I currently have a 1DsMKII and a 1DMKIII IMHO there is no comparison to any consumer camera to what a pro body will offer you. The two button thing becomes second nature after a week shooting it. I can reach and change any setting with either of my cameras(even though they are different in function) without taking my eye from the viewfinder. This is not a Nikon-Canon thing. I've also shot with a Pro body Nikon(D3) and if I were a Nikon shooter that would be my body. I recently picked up a 1DsMKII as an everyday/studio/whatever camera as opposed to using my 1DMKIII which is my sports workhorse, and I love it. Yeah its older, but I can assure you it will hold a candle to anything any Manufacturer has come out with in the non pro series for AF/IQ/Pixels.
Matt
Edit to add the 1DMKIIn is also an excellent quality camera, I've printed 40x40 posters at 3200ISO with about a 50% crop from a file. The quality was excellent and the customer was amazed.
Message edited by author 2009-04-07 13:35:42. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 03:33:30 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by MattO:
IMHO once you really spend some time with a 1 Series pro camera you won't want to hold another camera. I currently have a 1DsMKII and a 1DMKIII IMHO there is no comparison to any consumer camera to what a pro body will offer you. The two button thing becomes second nature after a week shooting it. I can reach and change any setting with either of my cameras(even though they are different in function) without taking my eye from the viewfinder. This is not a Nikon-Canon thing. I've also shot with a Pro body Nikon(D3) and if I were a Nikon shooter that would be my body. I recently picked up a 1DsMKII as an everyday/studio/whatever camera as opposed to using my 1DMKIII which is my sports workhorse, and I love it. Yeah its older, but I can assure you it will hold a candle to anything any Manufacturer has come out with in the non pro series for AF/IQ/Pixels.
Matt
Edit to add the 1DMKIIn is also an excellent quality camera, I've printed 40x40 posters at 3200ISO with about a 50% crop from a file. The quality was excellent and the customer was amazed. |
My 1DmkII is probably the best camera I have ever used, professionally or otherwise. The two button thing isn't a big deal once you get used to it. Like any camera, it has some quirks, but the performance is top notch. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 04:31:23 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
There is a really good article in the last Popular Photography (I believe it is April's) about going to a full frame. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 04:56:38 PM · #13 |
| I don't really need to remind you to make sure you aren't getting scammed. I'm not sure there are too many legit reasons why the 1DmkII would be a lot less than a 5DmkII. I'm not saying it's not real, but the lower the price, the more I'd put the old radar on alert. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 05:50:41 PM · #14 |
Just in case there is any confusion, the 1D MkII is not a full-frame camera. It is "APS-H" which is approximately a 1.3x crop. So it's a larger sensor than APS-C (1.6x crop) but smaller than full 35mm frame. Canon's lineup and their sensor sizes:
- The 1Ds series (Mk I, Mk II, Mk III are 35mm (Full frame) cameras
- The 1D series (Mk I, Mk II, Mk IIn) are APS-H cameras
- The 5D series (Mk I, Mk II) are 35mm (full frame) cameras
- All XXD and XXXD cameras are APS-C (1.6-crop) cameras as well as the old D60 and D30 cameras
Within each sensor size category (particularly the APS-C category) there is also some minor variation in physical size of the sensor. In particular, newer APS-C cameras tend to have slightly smaller sensors than older ones. this is a nit-pick, the differences are pretty much irrelevant. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 06:15:20 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Just in case there is any confusion, the 1D MkII is not a full-frame camera. It is "APS-H" which is approximately a 1.3x crop. So it's a larger sensor than APS-C (1.6x crop) but smaller than full 35mm frame. Canon's lineup and their sensor sizes:
- The 1Ds series (Mk I, Mk II, Mk III are 35mm (Full frame) cameras
- The 1D series (Mk I, Mk II, Mk IIn) are APS-H cameras
- The 5D series (Mk I, Mk II) are 35mm (full frame) cameras
- All XXD and XXXD cameras are APS-C (1.6-crop) cameras as well as the old D60 and D30 cameras
Within each sensor size category (particularly the APS-C category) there is also some minor variation in physical size of the sensor. In particular, newer APS-C cameras tend to have slightly smaller sensors than older ones. this is a nit-pick, the differences are pretty much irrelevant. |
Whats APS-H? |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 07:38:22 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by JayA:
Whats APS-H? |
APS-H is a smaller sensor than 35mm, but larger than APS-C. here's a quick comparison:
35mm sensor: 36mm wide by 24mm high
APS-H sensor: 28.5mm wide by 19mm high
APS-C sensor: 22.5mm wide by 15mm high
The APS sensor sizes given are approximate; Nikon's APS-C sensors are a little larger than Canon's, for instance, and neither are quite as large as an APS-C film frame. canon is the only manufacturer that I'm aware of producing an APS-H (approximate) sized sensor.
For the background on the APS formats go here. Note that the APS film formats never really took off, so kind of ironic that the format found market success in digital.
Confused yet? |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:05:28 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I don't really need to remind you to make sure you aren't getting scammed. I'm not sure there are too many legit reasons why the 1DmkII would be a lot less than a 5DmkII. I'm not saying it's not real, but the lower the price, the more I'd put the old radar on alert. |
Last time I looked, a 5D mkII was about $2700.
I bought my 1DmkII used with 15K clicks for $1700 right after the 1DmkIII came out, 1DmkIIn's were going for a couple hundred more. In either case, I'd expect the used price for both cameras to drop, not rise. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:22:20 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I don't really need to remind you to make sure you aren't getting scammed. I'm not sure there are too many legit reasons why the 1DmkII would be a lot less than a 5DmkII. I'm not saying it's not real, but the lower the price, the more I'd put the old radar on alert. |
Last time I looked, a 5D mkII was about $2700.
I bought my 1DmkII used with 15K clicks for $1700 right after the 1DmkIII came out, 1DmkIIn's were going for a couple hundred more. In either case, I'd expect the used price for both cameras to drop, not rise. |
ya, I may be getting confused by all the versions and looked at one of the other ones... |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:24:16 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I don't really need to remind you to make sure you aren't getting scammed. I'm not sure there are too many legit reasons why the 1DmkII would be a lot less than a 5DmkII. I'm not saying it's not real, but the lower the price, the more I'd put the old radar on alert. |
Last time I looked, a 5D mkII was about $2700.
I bought my 1DmkII used with 15K clicks for $1700 right after the 1DmkIII came out, 1DmkIIn's were going for a couple hundred more. In either case, I'd expect the used price for both cameras to drop, not rise. |
ya, I may be getting confused by all the versions and looked at one of the other ones... |
The 1Ds (Pro full frame) cameras are unlikely to be cheaper than a new 5DmkII. That's probably what you looked at. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:31:39 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
The sigma lenses and the prime lens that is listed should do ok on a nikon fullframe I think? Why don't you start saving and see if a new FF body from Nikon comes out soon. Not to start another discussion about this, but they are bound to do something to counter the 5DmkII. I'm wating for that camera. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:49:46 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by BJamy:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
The sigma lenses and the prime lens that is listed should do ok on a nikon fullframe I think? Why don't you start saving and see if a new FF body from Nikon comes out soon. Not to start another discussion about this, but they are bound to do something to counter the 5DmkII. I'm wating for that camera. |
I'm pretty sure thats the D700......still very seriously thinking about that one. Either way I need to get something that can handle indoor conditions at high ISO without noise, and it seems to be either the D700 or 5D II. I wouldn't be able to use my best lens (the 17-55) on the D700 anyway, so I'm up for both lens(es) and body, which is the problem at the moment. Have a huge gig in August, shooting a classical music festival and can't use flash, so time is running out. The weddings I can swing at the moment, they're all pretty much in the middle of the day, but I may not be so lucky soon. I did one recently that was at the perfect time of day, but a huge black cloud came over and it rained heavily from the beginning to the end, and the D300 just didn't cut it noise-wise. I may have to sell my teenager or something...... |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 08:54:47 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I don't really need to remind you to make sure you aren't getting scammed. I'm not sure there are too many legit reasons why the 1DmkII would be a lot less than a 5DmkII. I'm not saying it's not real, but the lower the price, the more I'd put the old radar on alert. |
Last time I looked, a 5D mkII was about $2700.
I bought my 1DmkII used with 15K clicks for $1700 right after the 1DmkIII came out, 1DmkIIn's were going for a couple hundred more. In either case, I'd expect the used price for both cameras to drop, not rise. |
The trouble with living in Australia is that everything has gone through the roof. The 5D II is $5300 at the cheapest with a 24-105L lens. The D700 doesn't come with anything I'd be interested in, and is $3500 if I buy it from Hong Kong (don't want to, I've been bitten by the warranty problem once and never again) so $3800 min. from an Aussie seller. Body only. The 24-70 that I would need to replace the 17-55 is $2400. Given that we are a more expensive country anyway in terms of general living, its a big purchase!
I didn't mean to whinge about the prices though.....I'll find a way I'm sure, I was just interested to know about that Canon 1D, but after everything I've read here I don't think its what I'm looking for.
Thanks for all your input on this thread, I really appreciate it! |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 09:42:37 PM · #23 |
| Hey Spazmo99 and MattO, have you ever tried Dx format lenses on your MkII and MkIIn's? Just curious because the format is midway between Fx and Dx. |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 09:49:14 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
Originally posted by BJamy:
Originally posted by jettyimages:
No, I definitely am not determined to get a Canon - just desperate to upgrade to full frame and trying to deal with relatively new single motherhood.....so the cheap deal on the 1D made me think......
It sounds as though I'd be better staying with what i have though, I have some good lenses, although not particularly useful for the D700. Either way I'm feeling a little stuck! |
The sigma lenses and the prime lens that is listed should do ok on a nikon fullframe I think? Why don't you start saving and see if a new FF body from Nikon comes out soon. Not to start another discussion about this, but they are bound to do something to counter the 5DmkII. I'm wating for that camera. |
I'm pretty sure thats the D700......still very seriously thinking about that one. Either way I need to get something that can handle indoor conditions at high ISO without noise, and it seems to be either the D700 or 5D II. I wouldn't be able to use my best lens (the 17-55) on the D700 anyway, so I'm up for both lens(es) and body, which is the problem at the moment. Have a huge gig in August, shooting a classical music festival and can't use flash, so time is running out. The weddings I can swing at the moment, they're all pretty much in the middle of the day, but I may not be so lucky soon. I did one recently that was at the perfect time of day, but a huge black cloud came over and it rained heavily from the beginning to the end, and the D300 just didn't cut it noise-wise. I may have to sell my teenager or something...... |
So, I have the dx format d80, and I wanted to upgrade--but the onetime cost of the FX conversion was so high. So I upgraded to a DX D90 (a nice improvement over the d80), but bought lenses that are FX format. I'll probably get one more FX format compatible lens, and by the time I can get my D700, the price will have come down some. In the meantime, I get to use that great glass on my D90 :-) |
|
|
|
04/07/2009 10:24:33 PM · #25 |
the sony A900 is a good perfomer as well,mate it up with the zeiss glass and you have a winner, Zeiss makes the best lenses by far. with FF you will need top of the range glass. Consumer glass will not cut it
|
|
