Canon 1ds MRK 1: is it still worth it?

<p>I have been doing research on the prices of Full frame cameras and I realized that the 5d is not the cheapest full frame camera out there. I found quite a few Canon 1ds Mark 1's for about the same price/ slightly cheaper. However, I understand that this camera is six years old. Is it even worth it? Or has the six years worth of new technology rendered it kind of obsolete? Should I just get something newer like the 5d?<br>

P.S I heared it's a brick. </p>

<p>Goolge on "5d vs. 1Ds Mk I"....you'll get lot's of responses either way, but I'd go w/the 5D.</p>

It's a brick, and battery life will probably be less compared to a 5D (1Ds uses NiMH cells instead of Lion cells, which have less capacity and more weight).

 

It'll take pictures just fine though, though high-iso performance on the 5D will probably be slightly better.

<p>As long as the picture quality and battery life meets your needs, an old digital camera can be a bargain, if the price is low. Digital has a fast depreciation rate. A friend of mine bought a mint Nikon D1 for 50 bucks, spare battery included.</p>

<p>I have a 1Ds and a 5D, unless batteries, frames per second (1Ds is slow), and extreme low light and no flash, I prefer the 1Ds. The noise on the 1Ds is easily removed with noise ninja much better, in my opinion then noise from the 5D and the 5D does get noise above 800 ISO. As one writer wrote the batteries suck and are very expensive as is the battery charger if it goes bad.</p>

<p>I've got a tag-along question to the OP... How much do you miss higher ISOs, if you shoot the 1ds? 1250 doesn't seem terribly high, even shooting a good prime.</p>

<p>Robert,</p>

<p>I still use my 1D and I don't miss high iso, I was brought up with slow film, 25, 50 and 100 asa, I never used a film faster than 800, other than to play with, the 1D defaults at 200iso, that is where the best quality is so I gained a stop or two. My bread and butter lenses are all 2.8's, with the 50 1.4 along for very shallow dof when I want it, not really for the speed.</p>

<p>I would NOT trade my 6 yr old 1Ds for a brand-new 5D.<br>

The 'noise' thing is WAY overrated. I shoot up to 800 with nothing but a bit of chrominance NR in Adobe Camera Raw.<br>

If you need very long battery life, and cannot carry an extra one...<br />If you need the least weight possible...<br />If you need long strings of exposures (the 1Ds will shoot 10 raws in a row, then slows down quite a bit)...<br>

...then get the 5D.<br>

If you need the best AF...<br />If you need weather resistance...<br />If you need a built-in vertical handgrip...<br />If you need the film-like color responce that the 1Ds's color filters give it (that NO other, later Canon camera has!)...<br>

...then get the 1Ds.<br>

1Ds samples and tips: <a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~ladlueck/">http://home.earthlink.net/~ladlueck/</a></p>

<p>I know it is heavier and bigger, but there is something really nice about the build quality of the 1 series. I do have large hands so perhaps that is part of my preference of the 1Ds. </p>

<p>My full frame camera is an even cheaper antique, the Kodak SLRn. It appears to be similar to the 1Ds with respect to performance. I do not mind the low ISO. Like the 1Ds you can blast off quite a few shots then it takes a minute to catch up. It also has moderate battery charge life depending on what you are doing. I have gone through four hours without switching batteries, I do have four of them, which makes this acceptable. However in cold weather I have gone through 4 batteries in 2 hours! While my Nikon D2X runs for days and days and days on one charge, no matter what the weather!</p>

<p>Now that I have the SLRn I would not switch to the 1Ds but if I were choosing between the SLRn and SLRc (which takes Canon lenses) and the 1Ds, I'd take the 1Ds. Deciding between the 1Ds and 5D would be tough but I think I would go with the pro level 1Ds. It is possible to find the 1DsII for not much more than the 1Ds so that is also worth looking out for, but be careful because some of the lightly used ones sell for almost as much as a 5DII. </p>

<p>The 1Ds is a top quality pro camera capable of taking excellent photos. Yes its heavy and the batteries are not the longest lasting. With careful shooting and processing I've printed very good images up to 36 inches.<br>

Many of the images on my site were made with the 1Ds.<br>

<br /> Architectural Photography by Peter Montanti, www.mountainphotographics.com</p>

<p>Hello - I'd like to chime in on the conversation. I am in a similar boat. I am getting into wedding photography, have a professional photographer to assist and looking for my first "pro" camera. I've had a d90 for some time now and looking to switch over to a canon 1-series (I don't have a big investment in nikon lenses, and I like what I see for canon - I don't want to start that conversation...) Anyways I have been going back and forth between a Canon 1ds (Mark I) and s Canon 1d Mark ii - they both can be had for the same basic price. I would love to know anyone's opinions. I know the FF of the 1ds would be helpful for some situations, but I think the speed and noise (and flash processing) of the Mark II might be the better choice. Also, lens recommendations would be appreciated. Thanks!</p>