What is better (wedding/general) tool: 5D or 1DmkIIN?

[linda_pullman]

MY CONCLUSIONS/OBSERVATIONS AND QUESTIONS:

 

Currently 5D + Battery Grip (grip is a must for me) and 1DmkIIN have almost the

same price - I mean the difference is not that significant in this category.

 

Which camera do you find doing better job for you? My question applies mostly

to wedding shooters but not only. General miscellaneous applications also

included.

 

The 5D's biggest "plus" is resolution. FF is not so important to me (I think

so). I've had a chance to take a few shots with 5D and compared them to my

30D's images and general image quality seems to be the same - 30D makes

beautiful pictures. Of course the resolution of 5D is definitely better, but I

so rarely make prints larger than 13x19. What I also notiCed is that 5D's files

are huge what requires extra costs on CF cards and PC hard drives. I have a

feeling that it takes more time to process 5D's images for the applications

like Photoshop. So looks like 5D requires next investment - top speed computer,

especially when you need to process hundreds of images per event.

 

1DmkIIN? - Hmmm! A dream camera. However, I don't need the weather sealing. I

would buy this camera for its features. The question is: Does it operate really

better than 30D? As I know IQ of both cameras are the same. From time to time I

hear that 1DmkIIN is not that sharp. Is it true?

 

BTW, does 1DmkIIN with flash/ETTL operations work any better than 30D?

 

Please share your experience.

 

Thank you,

 

Linda

[lovcom_photo]

I just replaced two 1D Mark II's with 5D's....for wedding one wants wider DR, less noise, and more resolution.

 

However I miss the better feel, responsiveness (not FPS), and weight of the 1D Mark II's. The 5D controls feel kind of toyish and sluggish, and are not as responsive as the pro bodies.

 

For weddings, the 5D is better, and in general provides better image quality, especially with flash, and other light challanging shots.

[lovcom_photo]

With a 5D, your 13x19's will come out better...for enlargements megapixels will ALWAYS trump interpolation programs.

 

The fact that the 5D images are bigger then those coming from a 30D is negligable in cost....CF cards and disk drives are so rediculously cheap that this should not be a consideration at all.

 

A 5D does NOT require a faster computer then does images processed from a 3D....sure they're bigger but not that much bigger...I think you're blowing it up bigger then it should be.

 

For weddings, for potential enlargments, for the best noise performance, and for the many wide angles shots you'll be taking, better to get the fullframe....your wide angle lenses are really wide angle lenses and not standard/normal lenses.

[lovcom_photo]

The E-TTL system works just as good with a 30D as it does with the 1D Mark IIn, by the way.

[tom_christiansen]

I moved from a 10D to a 1D II N. At the camera store I played with the 10D, 5D, 30D, and 1D II N. My subjective findings are listed below. Keep in mind that what is important to me is ease of manual focus (mostly for macro but also for general landscape, portrait work) and fast, accurate auto-focus for sports (ice hockey mostly).

 

It seems the 10D, 20D, 30D, 5D share the same style of focusing screen. That is the matte part of the screen gives about the same contrast when focusing. The 20D, 30D, 5D might be a tad better (or maybe just different) than the 10D. The 1D II N is a significant step beyond the others. Things really pop into focus making manual focus a breeze. The viewfinder in the 1D II N is a tad smaller than that of the 5D, but it doesn't seem 1.3x smaller... Maybe Canon fiddled with the magnification or something. In terms of viewfinder brightness, I seem to recall the 5D and 1D II N being roughly the same. Maybe the 5D was a tad brighter as it is a tad bigger...

 

AutoFocus: The AF system in the 10D is dreadfully slow, and the placement of the AF points makes no sense from a composition standpoint. Forget about rule of thirds here. The 20D, 30D are a tad better as far as the placement goes and the system appears to work a bit faster than on the 10D. As far as I know the 5D uses a modified version of the 20D AF sensor. It has six additional "invisible" AF points around the center point, but putting an AF sensor made for a 1.6x crop camera in a full-frame camera makes no sense. The AF system is very center-biased as a result. Again: forget about rule of thirds. The 1D II N 45-point AF system is phenomenal. Not only is it the most sensitive in the EOS line (it works down to a max aperture of f/8) it is also astoundingly accurate. Before I bought mine, I rented a 1D II (not N) for a weekend and shot a hockey game. When I came home and looked at the pictures, my jaw just dropped. Out of 400-ish pictures, less than 20 were out of focus or focused on the background. Sure, in many of them arms, legs, sticks were cut off and the composition sucked, but the images were IN FOCUS! I ended up with about 20 images that were worth publishing on-line (see: http://tinyurl.com/h94no). A month prior, I'd shot with my 10D but otherwise the same setup. Result: Four pictures worth publishing. Note that the 1D II and 1Ds share the same AF sensor. But the 1D II has a smaller sensor. Thus, the AF "sensor cloud" covers a larger area of the image. I find that for action this allows me to focus on capturing the action and let the camera worry about achieving accurate focus. Not so with the 10D where you're bound to those stinky five AF points.

 

Note that hockey presents some pretty unique requirements for the camera in terms of auto focus. You don't necessarily need a 1-series camera to shoot sports. I shot some baseball (http://tinyurl.com/hp39n) with my 10D with great results. I got frustrated with the poor performance of the AF system and turned AF off. Prefocus on where you think the action will be (second base) is a pretty good strategy. But for those kinds of sports where the action is a bit more unpredictable, the fast AF sure comes in handy.

 

I've also heard that the 1D II ships with the sharpness setting set a bit low. That's a pretty easy fix. Comparing pictures from the 1D II N and the 10D side by side, it seems like the pictures from the 1D II N are a bit sharper, cleaner. Probably because the AF system is more accurate. Or because with that camera I can actually see where the lens is focused -- something I cannot do as accurately with my 10D (even though my eyes are only 32 years old and see 20/20 with contacts).

 

I'd say that if you need a super fast sports camera with superb AF that also supports easy accurate manual focus (and don't mind the "ergonomic brick that shoots pictures" form factor), get the 1D II (or 1D II N). If not, then your options are more open.

 

Personally, if your choice is between the 5D and the 1D II N, I'd go for the 1D II N. Unless you care about the weight.

 

Pixel counters will tell you that with more pixels you get better images. While that sometimes is true, you should also consider the quality of the pixels. Also remember that you need to multiply the number of pixels by four to get a doubling in the printing resolution (DPI).

 

Tom

[jim_larson1]

What he said.

 

The 1D-II is all about the AF system and image taking speed.

[digitmstr]

The size of pixels of both cameras is the same, except the 5D has more of them thus, the quality difference is indeed noticeable. But, it's NOT about that, nor is it about price.

 

It's ONLY about what YOU need to do with the camera. The 5D works great for me because I do mostly portraits and I don't need the weather seals, fast shooting rates and multi-spot metering (among other things) provided by the 1DMKII.

 

Your needs will dictate which camera is best for YOU.

[digitmstr]

If you do weddings, general photography the 5D is clearly the camera for you.

[rtrace]

Linda,

 

Take a look here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GlSY

 

In the end, I bought a 1DMKIIN - the 5D was not the right tool for me. Don't listen to comments like, "If you do weddings, general photography the 5D is clearly the camera for you.". This is nonsense. It may or may not be for you. Try them both as I did. Don't jump to any quick conclusion. For years the 10D/20D and 1V were the tools for me..

 

For me, all the 5D had over the 1DMKIIN was more resolution, a slightly bigger viewfinder, and slightly less DOF due to the larger sensor. That's it.

 

The 1D, on the other hand, has 10-15 more things that I can name which aid me in my shooting - AF speed, more logical/better layout of AF points, speed, customization, feel, control, logical menus, logical layout, prevents you from switching things by accident easily (like shooting mode, etc.), etc., etc. If you've ever used a 1 series body (I've been using a 1V for years), you'll know what you're missing, and if you haven't go try it and see. You will never go back IMO.

 

In any case, please go try them both and see which feels right. In terms of quality, if you don't crop a lot or print large, 8MP is enough. And BTW, the 1D has more detail at higher ISOs, but a tad more noise. The consumer/prosumer 5D/30D have more noise reduction at higher ISOs at the cost of detail. There are a lot of things like this that users will never mention since they haven't used both and may not know.

 

So check it out. The 5D may be it for you or not. Or the 1DMKIIN. I was in the exact same boat if you read the post from the link.

 

There is more to the 1D than FPS and weather sealing.

 

Bogdan

 

PS Better is of course relative. I have awesome images taken with a 10D and 20D from weddings. The 1D has not improved my images - it just made it easier to shoot. It's just a tool.

[j.kivekas]

I own a 1D MkII but for wedding shooting I'd probably opt for 5D rather than 1D MkII N because of the full frame and regardless that 1D MkII will have a zillion times better focusing capability. The full frame and the very contorllable dof it gives is parametric for people photography. What ever you take, it will be a good camera. 1D MkII will definitely have more second hand value, but still for weddings I'd opt for 5D.

[rtrace]

Juha,

 

If you haven't shot weddings how can you say? What does "very controllable DOF" mean? I don't get it. Why is full frame so important for weddings? Why do people say if they haven't done?

 

Bogdan

[rokkor fan]

I am a wedding photographer with a 1DII and a 5D. I bought the 5D as a backup. It now shoots 70% of all my shots. The results are awesome - this is the best wedding camera available today.

 

Shoot sports? Get the IDIIN. Shoot weddings? The 5D IS your camera

[rtrace]

"Shoot sports? Get the IDIIN. Shoot weddings? The 5D IS your camera"

 

How do you know what Linda will prefer?

 

I can't believe at such silly/absolute posts.. I shoot events/weddings and my camera IS the 1DMKIIN, but I'm not claiming it is the one for all. Why are you? For me the 5D is a toy.

 

Bogdan

[j.kivekas]

Bogdan, I don't do weddings but I do people photography and if you look closely I was referring to people photography. I also said that which ever is chosen it is a good camera. For me the choice was the 1D MkII because I do mostly sports where you need ultra fast and reliable focus and shooting speed. I do sports gig for earning so the body needs to be rugged. Having said this, for pure people photography I would go for the possibility of the shortest dof and as you know with the same framing you get the shortest dof with the biggest film/sensor area. So if I'd do weddings I'd probably go for 5D since 1Ds is beyond my wallet. Yes, in a way you are right compared to professional 1D Mk II the 5D is a prosumer body. I do have a 10D as backup and it has earned me income so it certainly was not "a toy" and 5D is definitely a step forward from 10D in every sense.<br>

May be I should have kept my mouth since I don't do weddings. If I did I'd get desperate seeing all the men hanging and torturing themselves slowly. The beginning of the end, or, there goes my soon to be ex-wife who takes all my money. Sorry.

[linda_pullman]

Well, your comments are very interesting and different. Bognad's point of view seems to be very logical and closer to mine. I have two questions:

 

First one for 5D owners: You say that 5D's images are awesome. OK, I agree. Indeed I was impressed when I looked at the monitor and could enlarge the details. BUT, what is it needed for when clients so rarely order prints larger than 8x10/11x14? I understand that it is awesome for you and myself, BUT is it AWESOME 'for pictures (4x6-11x14)'? Is there any real difference in quality of your prints in this size range?

 

Second question for Bogdan/other 1DmnII(N) owners: OK, I realized that generally I don't need weather sealing and I don't need buffer of 1D level. I think I may need the multispot metering occasionally (however I don't know how it works, actually). I can say that the most important for me would be the AF and general responsivness. BUT, is just the AF worth such a huge money over the 30D? What is it exaclty in 1DmkIIN worth the upgrade from 30D in your opinion? (As I mentioned I don't need weather sealing or buffer).

 

OK, I have $3,000+ to spend. Should I buy 1DmkIIN(5D?), or just wait a few months for any news from Canon? Eventually buy some new lenses instead?

 

Linda

[jim_larson1]

That is a good question about the 1 series AF system.

 

My experience with a 50/1.8 and 17-40/4L is that the 10D AF system will work fine with good light.

 

If I attach a 85/1.2L to the front. . .with the insanely short DOF. . . I am not sure I will come up with the same answer. I do have a 85/1.8, but I have not shot enough portraits at F1.8 to be sure how the AF does in critical applications.

 

I do know that in low light. . .the AF does become dodgy when shooting wide open with F4 lenses.

 

Now, compared to the 10D, the 20D, 30D, and 5D have a single high precision sensor (the center one). That is all nice, but the AF *area* covered by that sensor is HUGE, unlike the high pecision sensors in the 1 series. If shooting at super shallow DOF settings. . .I wonder at the camera's ability to focus on the right part of the face.

[mostly sports]

Linda, have you hefted these cameras?

I have both, and use the 1DmkIIN for sports (I've taken to taking a monopod) and 5D for general shooting. I find the 1D with a large lens

too heavy. Try one with your wedding set up (flash, etc.) and see what you think.

[rtrace]

Linda,

 

Sounds like you're thinking now about the 30D as well. Why did I get the 1D over the 20D that I had? For the reasons mentioned in my post and the posts in the thread I posted in the link. Same would apply for me to a 30D, as it's still basically a 20D. Does it (1D) produce a better image? Not really - all I can say is that you have a larger sensor and thus the ability to use shallower DOF than on a 1.6x crop camera like the 30D. So you can get shallower DOF shots. The 5D has a bit more, as I also said. But other than that, all these cameras (30D, 5D, 1D, 1Ds) will produce outstanding images.

 

Don't think (see my PS in my post) that you will get better images. All that you will get is more resolution (if you get a 5D) and a larger sensor (5D or 1D/1Ds). Will you use that resolution? From what you say, you don't print large. But do you crop a lot? Then it may count. For me it wasn't important. Do you need full frame? I'd like it, but would only get the 1Ds. But I'm not paing $7000 to fund Canon's R&D department.

 

Anyway, the bottom line is that I used a 10D and a 20D and shot a ton of stuff as I said. I've been waiting for a long time to see what Canon's plans would be, before shelling out over $2000 on a body. So I used the 10D and 20D which were annoying to use for me (I was used to the 1V film body), but got me great results. Now I decided it was time to go to the 1 series body, since recently I started using my 1V a lot, and I started missing all the features that make shooting easier for me, which the 20D didn't have. The 30D/5D don't either.

 

All the stuff I mentioned are feautures that aid me in taking pictures. Larger/more informative viewfinder, spot linked to AF, layout of AF points, etc. etc.

 

In the end it's about what feels right in your hands - which camera will make it easier and more fun for you to shoot. Only you can find that out by trying them each. I did and decided on the 1D. Others did and decided on the 5D. When you're going to spend $3000+ on a body, you NEED to try it. Opinions are helpful, but in the end you'll be holding the camera.

 

Here's a question for you. Why are you looking to replace your 30D? If you can't come up with a good reason, most likely you don't need to. I gave you my reasons.

 

 

Juha,

 

By "toy" I meant that for $3000 I expected something better. I also used a 10D and 20D, but I still call them toys! As far as weddings go, it is easier to use the 1D over the 10D/20D. Speed is important! As is the ability to see FEC and EC at the same time in the viewfinder! Can't do that on the 5D. Small things like this become important. And there are SO many small things that the 1 bodies offer that may or may not be important to you. To me they are. I love the ability to customize the camera so much for how I shoot for example. Things like that.

 

Jim,

 

I will disagree. IMO, the focus point layout on the 1D is the best of all. Even better than the 1Ds, since it's the same size but covers a slightly smaller sensor. I hated the layout on the 10D/20D. As far as AF speed and accuracy, the 1D/1Ds are faster. Especially when not using the center point. With center point, they are probably about the same. But the accuracy seems better. And overall, it's just more responsive - from shutter actuation down to writing to the card the camera is responsive. The 5D felt funny - a bit slow in a way. Maybe better for studio shooting.

 

Bogdan

[rtrace]

Phil,

 

Linda said she'd use a grip with the 5D, so the weight difference is not that huge. The 5D is nice if you don't need a grip and use light primes/zooms. But light primes and zooms are not that high quality (except for a few) and would be wasted on a 5D! Otherwise it doesn't balance well with heavy lenses - especially L glass.

 

Bogdan

[lovcom_photo]

Bogdan, why are such a zealot for the 1D Mark IIn?

 

The original poster wrote that she needs a camera for WEDDINGS.

 

Weddings...you think that more resolution, less noise is not a big deal.

 

For wedding photography, Bogdan, it is EVERYTHING.

 

Why use a sport/PJ camera for weddings? Better to get the highest resolution, least noise....for weddings, AF speed, and FPS rarely ever come into play.

 

And you say the most amazing things.....L glass does not balance well on a 5D w/grip? It sounds like you have never used one....I have had to 1DM2's and now 2 5D's and for weddings the 5D is the best way to go.

 

Weddings mean enlargments, so guess what? Interpolation will never beat mega-pixels, to be sure.

 

For me wedding business I replaced two 1DM2's with the better 5D's, and I did it for a reason.

 

And as far as weight, the 5D with grip is still VERY noticably lighter then the 1DM2, to be sure...yet the 5D balances lenses in very very similar ways (with grip).

 

Bodgan, she shoots weddings...WEDDINGS ;-)

[lb-]

"...she shoots weddings...WEDDINGS ;-)"

 

so does bogdan :)

 

many of us here shoot weddings.

 

some of us have even been at it for a while.

 

it would seem you've shot one.

 

really any of these cameras are fine.

 

just tools. nice to have choices.

 

judging others for their choices seems really silly to me.

[rtrace]

Dan,

 

Please read my posts. If you do, I don't see how you can call me a "zealot for the 1D Mark IIn".. I said that is what *I* chose and advised Linda to try them both. Quoting myself below:

 

"In the end it's about what feels right in your hands - which camera will make it easier and more fun for you to shoot. Only you can find that out by trying them each. I did and decided on the 1D. Others did and decided on the 5D"

 

So I'm a zealot? What I am against is people who make statements such as:

 

"Shoot sports? Get the IDIIN. Shoot weddings? The 5D IS your camera"

 

or

 

"If you do weddings, general photography the 5D is clearly the camera for you."

 

So I responded to statements like this and you show me where I'm incorrect. I believe I'm pretty objective. I've not said to get the 1D. But the question was asked (5D vs. 1D). And Linda asked me again for my reasons/opinions. So I responded. Please read the entire thread..before coming across as ignorant.

 

Anyway, in reply to your post where should I start? I think you are a bit ignorant to be quite honest. I shot weddings with a 1V, 10D, 20D, and now 1DMKIIn. I was in a similar position - read the link. I know what it's like to shoot a wedding and events. Plenty of pros use the 1D for weddings - they don't look at a marketing label...They realize a camera is a tool and pick the tool based on what their needs are. For me those needs were met by the 1D. I'm glad the 5D is working for you. I said as much, so I'm not sure you're reading what I'm writing. For some the 5D is the right tool and for others it's not. If that's hard to understand, then I will say you are being a 5D zealot!

 

Also you don't seem to understand what I said regarding weight in my last post. I said that with a grip, the weight factor is not that big of a difference. That's all! Then I said that w/o a grip it doesn't balance nice with heavy glass. What's hard to understand about this?

 

And in response to:

 

"Bodgan, she shoots weddings...WEDDINGS ;-)", all I can tell you is that there are PLENTY of pros who use the 1DMKII and 1DMKIIN for weddings. If you are an active shooter you should know this...

 

Bogdan

[lovcom_photo]

Lucas, I've shot many events and weddings.

 

Having spent two years shooting events/weddings with 1DM2's, I have a more the familiar understanding of what wedding photographer's need in a tool, specifically, a camera.

 

I was just commenting on why she is pushing the 1DM2 so much....Bogdan, but the way are you talking about the 1D or 1DM2?....you keep using 1D...this causes confusion...the 1D had a CDD with only 4mp...even a worse camera to use, for lack of mp.

 

And yes, one can generally place some bodies in certain catagories....sure the 1DM2 can do a fine job in weddings, but it's mission is more sports/PJ.....the 5D with it's 12.8mp, BETTER noise performance, make it a better choice for weddings, even as it does not feel so "professional" in the hands, nor does it have the crisp responsiveness of the 1D series.

 

Thi issue is much more objective, then subject...like you said, it's just a tool, ok, so I say use the best tool for the job...again this really is not subjective.

[lb-]

sorry dan I got confused by your earlier posts where you state that you shot your first wedding on 2/25 of this year.

 

my bad.

[picturesque]

I debated about posting because I do not own either of these cameras, but since no one has actually answered some of Linda's later questions, I can answer at least one. I have a 20D and shoot weddings. I have seen wedding enlargements up to 16x20 from a 20D (mine), a 5D and a 1DMkII, from the same lab. There are no differences I can really see at that size, much less an 11x14 and smaller. I do agree that more resolution is more resolution--can't argue that--but more resolution doesn't show up at this size in a print. Perhaps if the subject matter were a big group of 100 people, or a landscape with an extra long dynamic range, you might be able to see a difference. Or if you cropped deeply. Otherwise--for these wedding subjects--half and full lengths, and close-ups of people, I can't see it, and I'm pretty picky.

 

I am really interested in this thread because I will probably be getting another digital body sometime soon. If it were me, I'd wait for Canon's next round of announcements. If you're not in a hurry, why not? By the way, what are you using now? I would appreciate better AF than my 20D, but I've learned to deal with it and can't say that it has caused me a lot of trouble.