Jump to content

Mark IIDN or EOS 5D?


bob_keen1

Recommended Posts

I've been using a 1V for a couple of years, but with the intro of

these two new bodies, this may be a good time to jump over to digital.

They are close enough in price for me to rule that out as a factor.

Any opinions on the best choice. I enjoy all around photography. My

everday lense is a 24 - 85. I have a 1 - 4L IS for telephoto. There

doesn't seem to be a lens which would replicate close to this range

for the IIDn. Any thoughts would be very much appreciated. This is

my first digital and I want to make the best choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>This is my first digital and I want to make the best choice.<<

 

Well, the "best" choice is the one that serves *your* purpose best.

 

If you need the weather sealing, very tough construction, 45 AF, multi-spot and fast shoot sequence the 1D MK2n is the one for you.

 

OTOH, if you don't need any of the above and are looking for a FF camera with excellent image quality the 5D is a great choice.

 

I have opted for the 5D because I don't need the features of the 1DM2n.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you want the ability to have the smaller body and add on the extra heft of a battery pack only when you need it, or do you want the permanently bigger body? If you want bigger, you want the 1dIIn. Otherwise, the 5D is much more customizable as far as the size body you want to carry.

 

I only wish I were in your position of being able to get either.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not get the 1DII unless you need 8 frames/second, or need to AF at f8 (do you use

a 1.4X converter with your 100-400?), or frequently find that you wish you had longer

lenses when using your 1v (in which case the 1.3 X 'crop factor' of the 1DII will work in

your favor). If you like the view through your 24-85 at the wide end, you'll be

disappointed in what you see through the 1DII, again due to that 'crop factor' (your 24 mm

will have the FOV of a 31 mm).

 

Also, you will likely find that your new DSLR will reveal optical flaws in your lenses that you

never noticed on film, especially in the corners with the 5D. While I don't have the 24-85,

I do have a 100-400, which I use with a 1DII. I go to great lengths to not shoot wide open

at 300-400 mm with my 1-4 (stopping down just a bit helps sharpness considerably). My

second-hand understanding is that the 24-85 is a good but not great lens. So,

be prepared to start wanting better glass when you get your DSLR (5D or 1DII). With a

top-quality lens, DSLRs deliver amazing image detail -- but you will clearly see if your lens

isn't top quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my point of view, the 1DMk2N and the 5D have nothing much to do with each other.

 

The 1DMk2N is a professional camera that priorities professional build and continuous

drive speed and stamina. It is a specific design compromise attractive to photographers

who mainly need to capture fleeting moments, such as sports photographers.

 

The 5D is a semi-professional camera and has far more in common with the 1DsMk2 than

the 1DMk2N. It has high resolution (though not quite as high as the 1DsMk2) and very

limited continuous drive performance (even less than the 1DsMk2). The 5D is (reportedly)

nicely built, but not at the same level as the 1D cameras (mainly a sealing issue). The 5D

could be described as a baby, stripped down 1DsMk2.

 

If you shoot sports, or something comparable, you should be looking at the 1DMk2N.

Otherwise, you should be comparing the relative merits of the 1DsMk2 and the 5D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on the kind of work you do and what your ultimate image presentation is. Do

you print large? Do you need 8 fps? Do you use teles or wide angles? If you shoot sports,

photojournalism, weddings, etc. I'd suggest the 1D2n. If you shoot landscape, print very

large, value lighter weight, then the 5D may be the ticket. Really, they are built for

different purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're shooting sports or birds on the wing, get the 1D whatever. Otherwise, you'll get more for your money with the 5D. All your lenses will work the same with the 5D as with your film body.

 

Just don't go standing out in the rain for hours on end with it. Treat it like you would that old F-1 in your closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Treat it like you would that old F-1 in your closet"

 

You mean put it in the closet and leave it there?

The F1 was built like a tank. It is probably more durable than the 1DMkII. And surely can take a lot of rain before the gears get so rusty that they stop whirring.

 

The 5D should be treated like 20D, or 350D. Gently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used a -1 from 1990, a -3 from 1998, and a -1V from 2001. Last autumn I finally decided that the 20D was a digital SLR worth a try, took them both on one major trip, have not used the -1V since, and recently sold it. But I was very sad to see it go. I take quite a lot of wildlife photographs, and like Mark I use a 100~400 for a lot of them, and I need EITHER to be able to put an Extender 1.4x on that lens and not lose AF (so, AF at f/8 on the now-departed 1V), OR have a high-res crop with no Extender (so, AF at f/5.6 is nominally a good enough spec on the 20D; I agree with Mark's advice about going down a stop if possible, and have not been very happy with my few MF efforts on the 20D with the Extender). So the 5D, in most other respects just what I need, has for me a critical shortcoming, at least for the wildlife photography. A slightly more subtle shortcoming, but one with much wider effects, is that high-precision AF on the 5D only works down to f/2.8, whereas it works down to f/4 on the 1-series bodies. That's a very poor match for all these nice L-series f/4 zooms we now have available. As for the 1DMkII/1DMkIIN, I discovered when using the -1V with the PB-E2 that I'm just not prepared to carry a brick round my neck for general photography; the unadorned -1V is my limit. These points may or may not be relevant for you, Bob, but you might like to give them a little thought. An alternative strategy for you might be to get a 20D now - they are available at a keen price as they come towards the end of their product cycle (18 months!) - and use it to learn about digital, then make the big change either to the anticipated unified 1-series camera when it comes out, or to what by then will be a much less expensive 5D. Whatever you do, the 24~85 lens is not likely to satisfy you on digital. If you go to FF the new 24~105 is the obvious choice (mine arrived the other day, and initial impressions on the 20D are very favourable). There is no exact Canon equivalent to the 24~85 on either a 1.3-factor or 1.6-factor camera, but there are combinations that cover the ground, and many people, myself included, have had good use out of the 17~40 as a standard zoom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the comments. I guess what I want is a MkIIN with no 1.3 cropping. That's the only drawback, I really like wide angle when traveling abroad. Guess I could go with the 17 -40 lens -- just wish it had a little more of the high end. By unified 1 series camera, is it anticipated they'll introduce something like the IIN that is full frame?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, one of Canon's senior people apparently gave a presentation somewhere within the last year in which he said that Canon do not plan to support the 1.3 factor long-term and will unify the 1D series at full frame. It is sort of plausible that that will happen about a year from now, and the 1DIIN is a stop-gap which will be replaced at the same time as the 1DsII by the new pro camera. However, I believe that in the same presentation he also said that Canon did not plan to introduce anything between the 20D and the pro range, and now there is the 5D, so believe what you will! It also seems likely to me that the new pro camera will use a much lighter and more compact Li-ion battery instead of the old-technology and heavy NP-E3 Ni-MH pack, and may accordingly have a body shell of a different shape from the 1D series, but that's pure guesswork.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bob. I agree with Robin on this one... get yourself a 20D. I was in a fortunate enough position to be able to make the hop from 10D to 20D last year but in hindsight I shouldn't have bothered. It's not that I don't think the 20D is an excellent camera, it is and does a great job at landscape and portrait work. I just realised my mistake when I started buying decent galss for it. I've recently bought the 16-35mm f/2.8L lens from Canon and it's a revelation. I wanted wide angle but didn't want to go down the EF-S lens route, knowing that I would buy a full frame sensor camera one day. The 1.6x factor on the 20D doesn't compromise my picture taking at all with this lens. My advice therefore is to taket he money for the 5D/MkIIN from your pocket and buy a 20D with the best glass you can afford. The eyes have to see before the brain can respond is what my old photography teacher used to tell me all the time. With digital, this is definitely the case. You will then have the right sort of glass when you do eventually move to full frame digital in a couple of years (1DMkIII?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<< The 5D should be treated like 20D, or 350D. Gently. >>

 

The 350D has a plastic body and the 20D and 5D has a magnesium alloy

body. Huge difference in strength, build quality and durability.

 

The 20D and 5D may not have the weather sealing of the 1 Series but they

can be subject to fairly rough use and exposed to inclement weather as well,

except for really severe/extreme weather conditions. The 20D and 5D will

work pretty much like a SanDisk Ultra II, and the Series 1 bodies will perform

like the SanDisk Extreme.

 

Your decision and reason for wanting one over the other would depend on

your shooting style and personal preferences and priorities. If you don't need

the 8 fps speed or use it under the most extreme weather conditions, and

image quality is the most important reason, then the 5D is IMO a no brainer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<I>The 350D has a plastic body and the 20D and 5D has a magnesium alloy body. Huge

difference in strength, build quality and durability.</i><P>

 

Sounds good, but I've heard from friends (and seen posts in Pnet) to the effect that

sometimes the resiliency of a plastic body lets it bounce after a drop, while a metal camera

gets bent and crunched. I wouldn't assume without question that metal is always and

invariably better than good plastics as a body material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i> I really like wide angle when traveling abroad</i><p>

 

The 1DMkII is a very heavy camera and not particularly appropriate for casual travel shooting. As people have said above, it's a camera for sports and photojournalism shooting. Its primary advantage over the 5D or even the 10D/20D is speed.<P>

 

I shoot sports professionally. I rent a 1DMkII for the events I shoot - at $100/night it's cheaper than buying, and I find it fairly heavy to carry around when I'm not doing something specifically to shoot. Also, the user interface is more complex and more uncomfortable to use while shooting than with the other cameras. It's fine during an event as you generally don't change things too much, but, once again, for general shooting, it's just not the right camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...