thomas_roemischer Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Dear Photogs Here is a big open question. How do you think these cameras will compare to eachother (not including the megapixels), as professional on location portraitcamera. I will be using the 85mm F/1.2 lens. Thom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian_coy Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I think that the 1D MkIII is primarily designed as a sports photographers camera, so I personally would stick to the 1Ds Mk II. The most significant differences between the two cameras are resolution, crop factor and framerate. Both are excellent professional level cameras, and I would think that the MkII is more designed for portraiture than the MkIII. Though I am sure in the end you would not be disappointed with either camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 what is not designed in Mark III for portraiture except the 10 frames ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sting1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Portrait photography benefits a lot from mega pixels! the 1Ds is far more suited for this. However, If you are ?portraiting? the 5D 12.8Mp is better then the 1D MkIII and of course far cheaper. My photography is quite varied so for me the 5D has the best of both worlds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_barbu1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 IMO, the only thing the 1Ds Mark II has on the 1D Mark III is resolution (megapixels). The 1D Mark III has better low light performance and a larger buffer, amongst other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beauh44 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 If I was using strobes I'd go with the 1Ds II because low-light performance won't really come into play and the extra resolution is nice. And it's not as though the 1Ds II's low-light performance is all that shabby; but I'm sure not going to disagree that the (much newer) 1D III has it "whooped" in that regard. With regards to the larger buffer, I've never maxed my 1Ds II's out shooting portraits. Just my .02 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mars c Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Your compairing a brand new camera with a several years old camera, with the age of the 1DS mk2, Its almost like compairing apple to orange. It would be much fairer to compare the 1d mk3 to the yet to be released 1ds mk2 successor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sting1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 mars c, I wouldnt have thought the technology is that much more advanced.. the specs are little different from each other. plus I would have thought Thomas would only be interested in factual information rather than just speculation on a camera that doesnt exist yet. From what I've seen the successor to the 1Ds wont be out until some time next year.. I didnt see it in the new canon catalogue. However, if he can wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 >>location portrait camera. I will be using the 85mm F/1.2 lens.<< Then, you NEED a FF camera, period. As you know, albeit the 1.3 sensor is not as samll as the 1.6, the smaller the sensor the more distance you neet to put between you and the subject to achieve the same framing as you would with a FF camera (given the same lens). Therefore, as the distance between you and the subject increases so does the DOF. For example: if you put eh 85 f/1.2 on both cameras you will have to step back a bit with the smaller sensor to achieve the same framing. As you do this you will see the background focus (DOF) cahnge as well. In portrait work, it's best to use a FF camera, no doubts about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_barbu1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 <p><i>With regards to the larger buffer, I've never maxed my 1Ds II's out shooting portraits</i></p><p>Oh, I don't think I would, either. I could definitely see it being an issue for fashion photographers, though, just as much as sports photographers.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I cant understand buying an old camera , mark III is new Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anson_ko Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 I don't understand why canon makes 1D and 1Ds. Just make 1Ds is enough and put all the features in there. Kinda redundant model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 yes exactly ! there is now a RAW and a sRAW, they could add a mRAW (medium RAW) with 10 MP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sting1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 1D, 1Ds - its called marketing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_macpherson Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Come on lads these posts are ALL about photographers, and as we all know the success of a good portrait session has a lot to do with the way the subject responds - it's not all taking - there's some giving involved too. Any savvy portrait subject will look at those little gold letters....and if they say '1DMk3' they will think "huh newbie - this'll be a real drag, needs a high frame rate to catch 'the moment' and his lighting ability must be cr*p". If those little gold letters say '1DsMk2' it's going to be more like "Hmm a classic camera, this guy's hot and has some pedigree". Hey - its your choice, but as a 1DsMk2 owner I'm more than happy that my megapixel pile is bigger than yours...... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 <I> Just make 1Ds is enough and put all the features in there.</i><P> Except for the minor technical issue that it's probably not possible with current technology to have a full-frame 10 frames/sec big buffer camera that is reasonably compact and affordable. Probably this will be routine in a few years, but right now, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_barbu1 Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/">Read the second paragraph.</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoneguy Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 How large do you want to make your prints? I don't think it matters either way. They are both pro cameras. I have a Reb XT, 20D, and a Mark IIn. I'll bet you couldn't tell what camera I used by looking at a print. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert lee Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 "... on location portrait camera ... using the 85mm F/1.2 lens." 5D. And get a second one for backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now