please help choose 5m2 or 1dm2? - DPChallenge Forums

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

02/22/2010 02:16:59 PM · #1

Hi all,

I am about to buy a 5dm2.

However I have an offer to buy a 1dm2 with a 70-200 f2.8 L-series lens used for $1800. I am tempted to buy the 1dm2 because it has low amount of clicks ( around 6K ) and both lens and body is an exelent condition.

I wanted to get your opinions on which one to buy...

I know the low light and high iso is great on the 5dm2. I was hoping to get some feed back on how the 1dm2 does against the 5dm2 in this regard.

If you are interested in knowing the type of photos I shoot ( just so you know what type of photography i do most since that would make a difference in buying decission ). please look here... ludwigortiz dot com ... I guess since i am new to this forum i can not post a url.. sorry for being a noob. =)

Thank you in advance.

- Luda

Message edited by author 2010-02-22 14:17:16.

scarbrd

Leica M10

02/22/2010 02:44:06 PM · #2

The 1DmII was a pretty fine camera for its time, but the technology moves pretty fast and this one is 2 generations behind. The 5dII will out perform it in just about every area except perhaps for weather sealing.

02/22/2010 03:20:18 PM · #3

Thanks scarbrd.

I know the 5dm2 is a newer camera newer chip.

Maybe its the lens and camera for $1800 sticker price thats making me think about the 1dm2. Is that a good deal?

I might get it for now and get the 5dm2 in the near future.

anyone else have an opinion?

Thanks,

Luda

Message edited by author 2010-02-22 15:22:33.

Simms

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/22/2010 03:25:27 PM · #4

5D mk2 - awesome camera - I`d recommend getting that.

And you would have a warranty with the 5Dmk2.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

02/22/2010 03:29:23 PM · #5

I have both. They're really different tools. The 1DmkII is a tank, it's faster, both in frame rate and AF. It's also big and heavy. The 5DmkII has loads of resolution, even lower noise and it's much lighter. But it's slower and somewhat less durable. It really depends on what you want to shoot with it.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/22/2010 03:38:21 PM · #6

The price, new, for the 70-200mm f/2.8L is around $1300; add $300 to that if it's the IS version. So, if the glass is in really good shape, the price of the 1DM2 is effectively $500-600 in this deal. That seems nearly irresistible to me, assuming you WANT the long glass a lot. That 1D will be a wonderful backup camera for a long time when you get the 5Dmk2 (or its replacement) in a little while. It's a crop-sensor camera, so you have more reach witht he same lenses, but less of a wide angle. It has a higher burst rate than the 5D2 and better weather sealing, so it's a good sports camera.

I donno, I'd be tempted to go this way if you want the glass anyway...

R.

TrollMan

Fujifilm X-T4

Fujifilm XF 35mm f/1.4

02/22/2010 03:55:17 PM · #7

I sold my 1DmIII (3) after I bought the 5dmII. While the 5DmII feels and sounds like a toy camera in comparison, I'm much happier with it. I would never trade it for the 1DmII unless I was to bring it on an antarctic or jungle trec.

02/22/2010 03:55:29 PM · #8

Thanks bear..

That is exactly what I was thinking. I do not have a 70-200 lens at the moment. I usually rent that lens when needed so that would be a nice addition to my gear bag.

The 70-200 f2.8 L is the non IS model in this deal. I usualy turn the IS off when shooting moving cars anyways. I find that the camera / lens gets confused when I pan with the IS on.

To SPAZMO99:

How do you find the 1dm2 noise levels at higher ISO? what is the highest usable ISO for the 1dm2 in your opinion.

BTW:
I looked at the images in your portfolio and there is no way i would be able to tell which image was taken with what camera. Even the ones you took with the 10d are amazing shots. That's a good thing IMO.

I Just do not want to waste the $$ if everyone tells me to just go for the 5dm2.

- Luda

Message edited by author 2010-02-22 15:59:25.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

02/22/2010 05:19:49 PM · #9

The combined value of the pair seems to be right about the asking price, so it's not a killer deal, but a pretty good one, especially if you have the opportunity to inspect prior to purchase. 1DMkII bodies seem to be going for around $850, and the 70-200/2.8L goes for around $950, possibly $1k if pristine. So you could probably get your $$$ back out of the camera body if it is in very good shape, at such time as you want to move to FF.

Tez

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

02/22/2010 05:41:24 PM · #10

if it was a 1dSmk2, I'd say go for that as I think they're the best all around camera for everything... but since it's the 1d2 I would take the 5d ahead of it.

Better ISO, better resolution, no crop factor, fantastic raw files and in my opinion, the best of Canon's recent offerings.

But of course, the choice is yours.

see

Canon PowerShot S95

02/22/2010 06:00:47 PM · #11

Truth be told coming from the 400D both cameras will blow your mind in improved quality. I have owned the 5D and now have a 1Dmk2. I like the size of the 1D, and the controls are easer to locate. Knowing what I know now, and if I was able to inspect before purchase, I would go for the 1D and lens.

02/22/2010 11:32:09 PM · #12

Thank you all for the input.

I will most likely pick up the 1dm2 and use it for the meantime. Then use it as a back up when I buy the 5dm2.

- Luda

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

02/23/2010 12:54:29 AM · #13

Originally posted by lortiz:

To SPAZMO99:

How do you find the 1dm2 noise levels at higher ISO? what is the highest usable ISO for the 1dm2 in your opinion.

BTW:
I looked at the images in your portfolio and there is no way i would be able to tell which image was taken with what camera. Even the ones you took with the 10d are amazing shots. That's a good thing IMO.

I Just do not want to waste the $$ if everyone tells me to just go for the 5dm2.

- Luda

At the size/resolution for DPC, I doubt you'd notice the difference. If you're shooting for the web/DPC, it's not really important which camera you use. I don't like to shoot with my 1D mkII at anything over ISO 800, with the 5DmkII, it's still pretty good at ISO 3200, but I haven't done a side by side comparison. I get tired of lugging the 1DmkII around, it really is a beast, especially with a big lens like the 70-200.

02/24/2010 08:32:05 PM · #14

OH Thanks SPORK99.

I am actually getting busy doing more printed work. So printed pictures is the main concern. I know that I can get away with a lot when processing for web view. Its finished printed product up to 16x20 that I am shooting for.

thanks again for all of the info.

- Luda

robshookphoto

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM

02/24/2010 09:58:23 PM · #15

I don't think this should be a discussion of which camera is better, because they are completely different. Overall the 5d II is probably the superior camera, but what really matters is what you shoot.

I use the 1d II/iii, 1ds II/iii, and 5d ii very consistently (free 24hr equipment rentals at my university).

You really need to decide which one fits your needs. I bought the 1d II about a month ago because I make money shooting sports photography. The 5d II simply does not fit the bill for this. That being said, the 5d II is the clear winner in most other aspects of photography.

As far as noise performance, the 1d II does very well, though it doesn't really compare to the fantastic 5d. If you'd like me to, I can post some shots here for you (full resolution) so you can check them out (I have stuff from all of the cameras I listed above, though no direct comparisons).

02/25/2010 06:05:19 PM · #16

To robshookphoto

Yes please post.

I would also like to know what lens you used to capture the image.

Much appreciated,

- Luda

robshookphoto

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM

02/26/2010 01:28:35 AM · #17

1d II, iso 3200, canon 200 f/2 IS:
//farm3.static.flickr.com/2766/4347538139_5bd632ff2b_o.jpg

5d II, iso 3200, canon 16-35 2.8
//farm4.static.flickr.com/3533/3936099480_2855638a0b_o.jpg
//farm3.static.flickr.com/2563/3936086714_b6525ab6d9_o.jpg
The 5d is going to give much cleaner results at high iso, while the 1d II returns useable, but not spectacular, results.

Message edited by author 2010-02-26 01:30:34.

Jedusi

02/26/2010 02:36:28 AM · #18

So here's a question - why not go for the 7D and get better AF and faster shutter speed than the 5D II, as well as a smaller body and larger file size / newer chip than the 1D II ?

I suspect the 7D could match or beat the 1D II on image quality, has 8 fps, 40'ish af points and all the latest tricks - plus costs less than either of the two cameras you are talking about.

Alternatively wait a bit longer and see what's realeased next - your 400D is a pretty nice little camera.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

02/26/2010 09:36:31 AM · #19

Originally posted by Jedusi:

The 7D has 19AF points.

But otherwise, I agree that it would be a good alternative.

Message edited by author 2010-02-26 09:37:14.

02/26/2010 03:06:38 PM · #20

THANK YOU Spork99.

You can see a huge difference in noise between the two cameras.

I will take a look at the 7D this weekend and see if i can get a good deal on it. I didn't even think about that till Jedusi mentioned it.

Thanks Again.

- Luda

Tez

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

03/02/2010 02:18:14 PM · #21

but 7d is 1.6x crop.

ewwwwww.

ragamuffingirl

Sony Alpha NEX-5N

03/03/2010 11:36:45 AM · #22

I want a 7D *cries*

Jedusi

03/03/2010 01:35:09 PM · #23

Originally posted by Tez:

but 7d is 1.6x crop.

ewwwwww.

So ?

The 1D is a 1.3 crop - still a crop.

Tez