1DS mk I and 1D mk II vs 5D autofocus performance

[bob_osullivan]

<p>I have spent hours searching here and on Google but found nothing specific to my question. I need to acquire a replacement backup to my 5D (not 5DII). Why? that's another story ;-)</p>

<p>I though I might try a 1Ds I or 1D II, instead due to the rumored auto-focus performance. The price point is now where I can justify it. I cannot consider a more current version of either at this time. So, no 1ds MkII or 1d Mk III. </p>

<p>The clinical test results do not inspire me or answer my question. I'd like to hear from people who have actually shot both or have owned both. I realize the 5D has it on the IQ, high ISO and the center AF point. My real question is, since the D series has multiple cross type AF points vs the 5D's center only, does that really translate into more keeper shots for you. I should also point out this relates specifically to wedding/low light situations for me. I am very accustomed to the 'use the center AF only and recompose tactic' but thought it might be useful to investigate the 1d series.</p>

<p>Again, I"m only really interested in AF performance (All AF modes). I'm sure the IQ and ISO performance will be fine for me based on what I've read. I use a lot of flash. So, some may ask "why don't you just use your 580's AF assist in low light". Well I prefer Auto Thyristor of my old Metz flashes for accuracy and consistency so there's no AF assist. I understand the 580 has an Manual Thyristor mode, but it's a nuisance to have to manually change ISO and Aperture on that flash via the menus and buttons so that is our for me. I do use the 580 for outdoors in ETTL II where it does ok. It just sucks indoors (at least for me). I also have used the 550 as master with flash turned off just to get the AF assist, but that doesn't make that much difference and it's a clunky configuration with the Metz handle bracket mounted as well.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your input.</p>

<p>Sully,</p>

[lad_lueck]

<p>1Ds, 70-200 2.8 IS. Minimum brightness to get 'instant' AF. First is center AF point. f2.8, 0.6s, ISO 800. Second is far-right AF, f2.8, 0.5s, ISO 800 (top-center AF was the same). The jpg's have brightness adjusted in PS to indicate how the scene looked re: actual brightness.<br>

<a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2475/3690522541_9aca1d97bd_o.jpg">http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2475/3690522541_9aca1d97bd_o.jpg</a><br>

<a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3691330354_62442caf43_o.jpg">http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3691330354_62442caf43_o.jpg</a></p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Hi Sully,</p>

<p>I haven't owned a 5D but have used them often enough. The AF is the main reason I own 1 series, from a 1D to a 1Ds MkIII, far and away the best value in any 1 series camera at the moment is the 1Ds MkII, I only just upgraded to the III because my last II got stolen. I have found the 1.3 crop of the 1D's to be a real hinderance rather than a complimentary advantage, so unless you are 100% sure the crop won't hurt you too much then you really should save the few hundred dollars extra for that model. If you can't then the only other one to get is the 1D MkIIn, make sure you get the n as you get a bigger screen and a generally nicer camera.<br>

To answer the original question, yes any 1 series AF, even my old 1D, will make you realise why some people will pay thousands more for a seamingly very similar body.</p>

[londoner]

<p>I have the 5D and 5D II, latter under heavy use right now in India under all sorts of lighting. And the autofocus is not very good, I'm afraid. I used the 1DIII on two occasions and the results are excellent, and yes, I have missed hundreds of shots due to the poor AF of the 5D series. If the upcoming 1DsIV has HD video, I'll be selling everything I own to get it.<br>

That said and done, the 5D II is a magical camera otherwise.</p>

[alec_myers]

<p>I have a 5D, and IDMkIII and the AF on the 1-series stinks, relative to the extra price. It really really sucks, particularly the AI servo mode. </p>

[bob_osullivan]

<p>Ah another perspective. Alec, could you be more specific? I had heard that the 1dmkIII had some seriouse AF problems. But I thought it was specific to that model only (perhaps a procuction issue). And, I thought they had worked it out. Did you send yours into Canon for the "fix"?</p>

[rddelliott]

<p> I have both the 5D Mark II and the 1D Mark III and shoot action sports. The AF on the 5D is not even close to the Mark III and my previously owned 1D Mark II.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I can compare the 5DII and the 1V which is essentially the same AF as the 1DsI and based on the few times I have shot the 1DIIN very similar to that camera. I have owned the 5DII for six months and have a pair of 1Vs that I used rfor many years. You are correct that the Af on the 5DII is not as good as the 1 series cameras but it really depends on the lens and what the subject is doing. The 5DII is really not as bad as people make out so long as you are careful with your Af settings. For critical work you really need to just use the high sensitivity center AF point (and re-compose if you have to). If you grew up (like me) with MF cameras then this is not that difficult to adjust to. The 5DII also only works well with faster glass - things that you might manage with a slow lens (slower than F2.8) and a 1 series body are not so reliable on the 5DII. In addition I have two other cautions on the 5DII - the first is that AF Focus is really useless (but it is not much use on the 1 series). The second is that you have top be aware of the invisible AF assist points when shooting critical shots (e.g. portraits at F1.2 - F1.8). In general I have the AF assist points on for AI Servo and off for one shot AF.<br>

Having just suggested that the 5DII has issues I do want to point out that with careful use and a fast lens for most purposes it works quite well. I have shot a lot of kids ice hockey in low light (EV 7 ish) generally in one shot AF and about 90-95% of shots are in focus. I have also shots lots of ski racing which has very high speeds and fast crossing rates as I usually shoot from on the course. Even with ski racing shot in AI Servo I am close to 100% - probably less than 20 shots out of focus out of over 2000 taken. The advantages I have found with the 1 series are:<br>

AI servo works well with multiple AF points selected - it does not on the 5DII<br>

AF works better with slow lenses although I have only one F4 lens<br>

A target that suddently appears (e.g. skier jumping over you as you lie under the jump) is usually not possible with the 5DII but is a reasonable probablity (50%+) with a 1 series body.<br>

If you are shooting pro sports the answer is get a 1 series (the 1DIII) as it has 10fps, 2 cards and a large burst depth. If you are looking at the 1Ds then the question is more difficult. You are obviously not shooting sports so unless you need the build quality, second card and multi-spot metering the 5DII is probably a better bet. The 5DII has better IQ than either of the two older 1 series bodies you mention and while you may not need the extra pixel they allow a lot of cropping - especially compared to the 1DII. For weddings the 5DII is probably the better bet while you do not think you will use the high ISO beleive me it is a godsend in poorly lit rooms. Since I do not shoot for a living any more I waited to go digital until I thought the pace of change had slowed so that I did not need to upgrade. When the 5DII came out I was unsure if it would work for me as I had read a lot about the AF issues. After using it a lot I have concluded that about 90% of the problems are due to user issues - mainly:<br>

Poor setting or understanding of how the AF system works<br>

Slow lenses and non-USM lenses<br>

Unrealistic expecations<br>

Anyone missing hundreds of shots either has a problem with camera settings or unrealistic expectations of the camera. The 5DII can track a giant slalom skier as they pass me at 80-90km/h when I am shooting from less than 15 feet away if you know how to use it. Even when I shot ski racing with an MF Canon F1 I doubt if I lost hundreds of shots due to missed focus!</p>

<p>AF is an area where Canon has room for improvement and from my limited use of a Nikon D3 I have to say that the Nikon is better. </p>

<p> </p>

[alec_myers]

<blockquote></blockquote>

<p>Regarding comparing the 5D and the 1DMkIII:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Did you send yours into Canon for the "fix"?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes - twice. It's been back to Canon 4 times this year, both with and without lenses.</p>

<p>I shoot a lot of indoor sports (dance) with area strobes. If I use the AI Servo, track subjects accurately etc, then many many of the pictures are front focused. I use the 70-200EF2.8IS and for a full length shot a fair proportion are front focused (very obviously, because you can see the markings on the hall floor). I now get better results by deliberately frustrating the servo tracking by using a double-tap - the first tap to get the lens to approximate focus then the second to mash the button down and get an instant fix for the actual exposure. (This sort-of corresponds with the Galbraith comments on where this camera is best.) If I allow the servo tracking to function, a full-length picture is likely to be front-focused by about 4-5 feet.</p>

<p>Secondly for presentation lineups: even on one-shot mode the focus on a static subject (person holding their trophy and standing still) there are great swathes of shots that are off-focus in between the ones that are sharp. Group shots with the 24-70EF2.8 are so variable in focus (back/front) that I have now avoid taking them.</p>

<p>Comments: this is all at f/2.8, in indoor sports-hall lighting, and I am not making it easy for the camera. But if it was an easy situation I wouldn't need a top-end camera.</p>

<p>The lenses are calibrated both by Canon, and tested to the point of nausea by me. I'm satisfied that on a tripod, and with a good target, the focus calibration is correct.</p>

<p>I have run through ALL the different AF settings, and after 12 months and 150,000 frames with this camera I'm satisfied it's not operator error that's causing these consistent problems. I can't be bothered to drive it back to Canon again - and after all they've "fixed" it twice, and each time it's come back with a duplicated letter saying "sorry for problems and your camera has been tested and is now performing to factory specifications". If this is factory specification then all I can say is that in the conditions that pertain for my application, it disappoints.</p>

<p>This weekend I was shooting outdoors at a street party, and mostly all of the pictures were in focus. Obviously the light was better, and the subjects moving slower or not at all.</p>

<p>In comparison with the 5D (which I used to use for the same indoor sports) I find that the 1DMkIII gives more useable shots, but from the useable ones, those from the 5D had much more accurate focus (in other words, fewer were "slightly off").</p>

<p>I won't claim the 5D was better, but I do say that I'm disappointed with the incremental improvement in the 1DMkIII. The only thing that makes the IDMkIII better for me is that I am not restricted to the centre focus point.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve_crist]

<p>I have a 5D (mkI) and a 1D MKIII. The MKIII focus capability is MUCH better than the 5D. The 5D only has one cross type sensor (the center) while the MKIII has 19 points. Auto-focus also works up to f8 on the 1D series while auto-focus only works to f5.6 on the 5D (allows for ease of use with teleconverters while keeping auto-focus). I have the later serial number on my MKIII so I've not experienced any focus issues, unlike Alec. The 1D series also allows you to spot meter off the selected focus point and has better overall metering (more metering segments than 5D). You asked about the MKII series and I'm sure the same traits apply to that over the 5D also. The MKIII simply improved performance across the board from the MKII bodies. </p>

[alec_myers]

<blockquote>

<p>I have the later serial number on my MKIII so I've not experienced any focus issues, unlike Alec.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't think the problems I have are related to serial numbers. Mine is also late serial, from 18 months after the camera's introduction and well after the original product recall. I just don't think the product performs well enough in the environment in which I need to use it. In general it's very easy to quote manufacturer's specification as to why one product is better than another, but a different thing to compare the two in the field.</p>

[hawkman]

<p><strong>does that really translate into more keeper shots for you. I should also point out this relates specifically to wedding/low light situations for me.</strong></p>

<p>

<p>Bob, I assure you 5DMKII AF is adequate for the very condition you describe above IF and only IF you use the center AF point only. 5DMKII AF is inadequate for some things, but wedding is not one of them, I personally know a few excellent wedding photographers that use MKII and are very happy with it, if other people can't get keepers most likely it is their technique and handling. MKII AF is not as fast MKIII or for that matter even the 50D but it is sufficient for wedding. I use my MKII for low light street shots as well as events with no problem as long as I know what I am doing and what to expect. For other subjects like BIF I use 50D and Nikon gear and I wouldn’t recommend MKII, but for what you do it is right on money.<br>

The original 1DS and 1DSMKII are dinosaurs now, they weigh a ton, LCDs are tiny and have poor res compared to 5DMKII not to mention you lose a good 1.5 stop of ISO with 1DSMKII and as much as 3 stops with the original 1DS. IMO there is no point in buying these bodies in 2009. </p>

</p>

[james_castagno]

<p>The 5D2 and a slightly used 1DSMk2 can be had for the same price, I just bought a 1DsMk2 with 9000 actuations for less than $2600.00. I sold a 5D to buy the 1DsMK2 and my keeper rate went up, it really made my 70-200 F2.8L IS perform like a pro lens should in regards to focus accuracy. With the 5D in a string of 8-10 shots there would always be a couple that were not as sharp as the rest, frustating when shooting portraits.</p>

[bob_osullivan]

<p>Thanks to all for the feedback. Based on the responses, I've gotta believe that 9 cross type sensors and 45 total have an advantage over 1 cross type and 9 total. So, I decided to go for a 1d MII. Found one with 20k actuations for a song.</p>