1D MkII vs. D200 and 20D

So I am using a Tokina 12-24mm on my 1d MII body and I was always pretty happy with the results, until I just saw pictures from my friend's new cameras: a Nikkor 24mm on a D200 and a Sigma 15mm on a 20D. Even pictures they don't put effort into a coming out AMAZING looking. So sharp, good contrast, etc. Maybe my lens is too low-end or my camera is getting outdated by these young guns, but I have no idea how to give my pictures that BOOST. (And I've discussed it with my friends and they agree it is the equipment, not the subject or the photographer that is making this difference). Any thoughts on my little predicament? And input is welcome!

-Justin

I wouldn't call a 1D MkII old - and the 20D isn't much newer although the D200 hasn't been out long. And I've heard good things about that lens - been impressed with all the Tokina lenses I've used. It's all good equipment that you're talking about.

Even if the photographers say it's not them, it's the equipment that's not very true. I've seen more bad examples from great equipment than I can count. I've also seen great shots from old, inexpensive, beat-up equipment too. It's a matter of so many things; setting up the camera, lighting (and use of only available light) for example. Did they do any post processing?

One member here had a pair of D100's and a few lenses. He sold all that and went to a Canon 10D when they were current. He's still shooting that camera and also has another one just like it - and a few Canon lenses. His work always was excellent and still is. Put his older Nikon shots side by side with his newer shots from the Canons and I doubt you'll know which was taken with which. It's him. I don't know if this is the answer you're looking for, but in this case I don't think better equipment will be the answer.

One word..... SIGNALS....

Ok, explanation:
Using NON-Canon lenses WILL cause issues with the AF. After two years of using the Sigma 70-200 on my 1D it killed the AF. Why? The signals are not the same as the Canon lenses and after a while it causes issues ..... almost $300 to repair (counting shipping both ways).

JS

Justin,

What I can tell you from previously owning all of the cameras at one time... The Canon 1D series will always require more post production work that the 20D, and the D200. Both of these cameras are geared toward the consumer. When shot via JPG it will have A LOT more in camera processing to make the image look sharper and color balanced.

What I learned from a Rob Galbraith seminar for the 1D mk2 was to sharpen your images in two stages...

First, open the file and then sharpen 270% at .3 pixel at 0 Threshold. Once done, go to the edit menu and then Fade Unsharp Mask, and chose luminosity. This will elminate the anti alaising filter effects. This is for Photoshop CS

For Photoshop CS2 it's smart sharpen...

Now edit the photo and then resharpen the image for the final product.

Loren

One more thing... your 1Dmk2 has a bigger sensor than either the 20D or the D200.

So, I wouldn't sell your 1Dmk2 anytime soon...a lens will be a better investment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by racingpinarello

First, open the file and then sharpen 270% at .3 pixel at 0 Threshold. Once done, go to the edit menu and then Fade Unsharp Mask, and chose luminosity. This will elminate the anti alaising filter effects. This is for Photoshop CS

For Photoshop CS2 it's smart sharpen...

Now edit the photo and then resharpen the image for the final product.

Loren

---

Very good points. I figured the D200/20D were more consumer oriented and my 1dmKII needed more post work but (as it may sound obvious) I am still searching for the best answers to sharpening and color correcting my images. Thank you very much for the sharpeningtip! I appreciate it. I tried that and it works great! When choosing the Fade Unsharp Mask and changing it to Luminousity, would you sugest I keep it at 100% or adjust it for every image?

And Very True, the 1DmkII has the larger sensor so when using the Tokina 12, it becomes a 15ish mm, which is what I am aiming for with many of my sports shots. So I guess I won't sell the beast for a tool of less professionalism, but it is interesting to compare and get everyone's input!

More input and opinion is also welcome!

Thanks again, Loren!

JS,

SIGNALS? I've never heard of that but I believe it. I sold my Sigma 15mm because I thought it was a little soft. How long did you use the non-Canon lens before the difference was apparent?

-Justin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSPhoto

Using NON-Canon lenses WILL cause issues with the AF. After two years of using the Sigma 70-200 on my 1D it killed the AF. Why? The signals are not the same as the Canon lenses and after a while it causes issues ..... almost $300 to repair (counting shipping both ways).

JS

---

Is this true for Nikon bodies and non-Nikon lenses as well?

Not a problem with Nikon that I've heard. Currently I have a Tokina and a Sigma and no problems with either, and I've used a few other Tokina lenses with it in the past. A friend has used Tokina and Tamron lenses for years with no problems too.

Hey Justin,

When fading luminosity, you can keep it at 100%. Create an automatic action in PS and you will only be a click away to getting to a good starting point.

Loren

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by racingpinarello

Hey Justin,

When fading luminosity, you can keep it at 100%. Create an automatic action in PS and you will only be a click away to getting to a good starting point.

Loren

---

Thanks again! That trick is now the first thing on my list when correcting my photos!

-Justin