Tell me NOT to do it....1D MKII

[Trevor Ash]

Remember that XBox/Scotch thread about getting a job earlier?

Well, I think I'm going to put that money towards something else....the 1D MKII. I can't believe how affordable it "seems" since the recent $500 price drop. The only reason I can think of (other than money) that I shoudln't buy it is that I really havn't been taking a lot of photos in the last year. Because of that, it doesn't make sense to buy the camera. But on the other hand I've been becoming increasingly frustrated with my 10D and the upgrade is VERY appealing.

I'm a little bit worried about my assumptions about the 1D MKII. For example; one reason I want to upgrade is because of my focusing problems with the 10D. Not just autofocus but because of the smaller viewfinder I also have troubles manual focusing. My eyes strain a lot these days as I get older and I can only look through the viewfinder so long before my eyes get tired.

I used to shoot with the EOS-3 and LOVED the viewfinder in it relative to the Canon D30 which I one reason why I sold the D30 and went back to film with the EOS-3. I still have the grid focusing screen that I can use on the 1D that I loved so much with the EOS-3. So, the brighter and larger viewfinder is a big reason for wanting to upgrade.

I've sent my 10D to Canon once in the past along with my lenses at the time so that they could adjust the autofocus performance of the camera. It came back much improved but I've since changed my lenses around and only have a couple of the original lenses. Needless to say, I can't STAND the idea that any new lens I buy has the potential to suck on my 10D autofocus wise. My big question for those in the know; Will I have the same problem with the 1D MKII?

There are many advantages that the camera provides. And it wouldn't be a stretch in any way to pay for it. With a $1500 tax refund, selling the 10D, and a few other things it's nearly paid for. So money isn't a huge issue. I just don't want to be right back where I was with autofocus. I mean who cares about fps and autofocus performance if it can't focus any better than the 10D?

Any words of wisdom for me?

Here's my list of things I like about it:

1. Bigger and brighter viewfinder….(98% fov)I have a hard time focusing with the 10D at many times
2. Better auto-focus. I can't even use the autofocus on the 10D
3. It takes SD cards so I can use the 512M card I bought in this camera!
4. The SD card I bought is one of the fastest cards for that camera (in that size) which is also faster than any of the CF cards.
5. 2 inch LCD screen
6. Very quick startup time (0.8 second)
7. 1.3x instead of 1.6x crop factor. Perhaps my fisheye will fit?
8. 8.5 fps
9. 8.2 MP instead of 6.2
10. Interchangeable focusing screens
11. 1/250 shutter sync (vs. 10D's 1/200)
12. Firewire!
13. 45 autofocus points
14. Spot meter (2.4%)
15. Dedicated FEL button next to shutter dial instead of having to reprogram that rear button like on the 10D
16. Writes to cards MUCH quicker which means pano's could be better quality due to not waiting for RAW's to write and I could potentially bracket each position as well...big feature for me.

[schrackman]

If only we were all in such a quandry! If money is not an issue (which is always the case with me, lol), then I say go for it, although personally I can't see spending that much money unless I owned a professional photography studio with all the appropriate lighting and equipment. But that's just me. Hopefully you can find out first if there are similar problems with the autofocus. Let us know either way you choose. And anytime you want to trade away that 10D for a DRebel (yeah, right!), just let me know. I'll gladly put up with the viewfinder and autofocus problems. ;)

[Franglais]

You know me. Nikon user (D70 etc). Close to my money. Not one to make rash purchases. Let's look at your list of reasons as though I were you:

1. Bigger and brighter viewfinder?.(98% fov)I have a hard time focusing with the 10D at many times

>> This is an excellent reason

2. Better auto-focus. I can't even use the autofocus on the 10D

>> Too bad about the 10D's focussing. Haven't heard anything bad about the focussing with the 1D Mk II

3. It takes SD cards so I can use the 512M card I bought in this camera!

>> Why use two card formats? Sell the SD card

4. The SD card I bought is one of the fastest cards for that camera (in that size) which is also faster than any of the CF cards.

>> The fasters CF cards are almost as fast as the SD card in the 1DMk II according to tests I've seen

5. 2 inch LCD screen

>> Still too small to see the picture clearly

6. Very quick startup time (0.8 second)

>> Excellent reason but all the latest generation of bodies have this

7. 1.3x instead of 1.6x crop factor. Perhaps my fisheye will fit?

>> I has a fisheye once but I never used it. If you have a lot of Pro lenses already then the 1.3 factor of the 1D Mk II is an advantage. However you can't use the range of EF-S lenses designed for the smaller sensor

8. 8.5 fps

>> I certainly don't need this

9. 8.2 MP instead of 6.2

>> I'm not sure that this is really a significant gain. 6Mpix is already good

10. Interchangeable focusing screens

>> I don't need this

11. 1/250 shutter sync (vs. 10D's 1/200)

>> This is not a significant improvement

12. Firewire!

>> That's an advantage. But USB2 is just as quick

13. 45 autofocus points

>> I can't see that being a significant improvement

14. Spot meter (2.4%)

>> Useful occasionnaly

15. Dedicated FEL button next to shutter dial instead of having to reprogram that rear button like on the 10D

>> That's Canon-speak. Don't understand

16. Writes to cards MUCH quicker which means pano's could be better quality due to not waiting for RAW's to write and I could potentially bracket each position as well...big feature for me.

>> If you do a lot of RAW that's useful

One thing you haven't mentioned - perhaps not important to you. You're trading a small fairly light camera for a big, heavy, expensive, eminently stealable professional camera. Personally I like to have a camera with me most of the time, and the 1D Mk II is not suited.

Most of your problems are satisfied by the 20D or even the Rebel XT. However if you have the money and you want the 1D Mk II then I would go for it.

Charles

[Sebastian]

Trevor,

The 20D has better low-light focus and better noise qualities. Unless you need weathersealing and 8fps, I would consider that and use the extra cash for the 70-200IS...

And this is coming form someone who REALLY WANTS a 1D MkII,

[Trevor Ash]

I need to put one of these camera's in my hand and see the difference in performance. I forgot to mention that one of the problems with the 10D is in shooting RAW....it takes a LONG time to flush the images to the CF card. Also, when previewing the images I can't STAND how it does that low quality scan then about 1.5 seconds later you see the image "improve" on the LCD. It just annoys me.

I spend a lot of my time doing panoramic photos and because the 10D is so slow writing to the CF cards I can't effectively bracket because too much in the scene changes by the time it's done writing three RAW images.

I definetely need to go in a store and see how the 20D and 1D MKII handle in these regards.

I haven't heard about the 20D having better low light autofocus and that surprises me so I'll look into it. I'll also look into the noise quality differences.

Thanks for all the help so far.

BTW, I never listed my negatives but weight/size isn't too big of an issue. I still use my G3 a lot just for that reason. I also bought that little point and shoot recently for all around use.

Keep the words coming!

[Trevor Ash]

Trevor,

The 20D has better low-light focus and better noise qualities. Unless you need weathersealing and 8fps, I would consider that and use the extra cash for the 70-200IS...

And this is coming form someone who REALLY WANTS a 1D MkII,

Sebastian,

Can you point me to some reviews/articles/threads where they talk about these factors?

[racingpinarello]

Hi Trevor,

I will only tell you that the Canon 1dmk2 is an incredible camera and is very similar to the EOS 3 focusing.

I bought an used EOS 3 along with the Mk2 and both have very similar feel. The bigger viewfinder is nice and the body is amazing to use.


It will be the closest thing to a EOS 3 or 1V.

Loren

[Trevor Ash]

Regarding the write speed. The "numbers" at robgalbraith suggest that I'd go from about 1.115MB/sec with the 10D and my microdrives to about 7.9MB/sec on the 1D with the SD card I already have. This is one of the big reasons I want a better performer because I'm *assuming* that the image preview on the LCD will also be quicker...both immediately after the photo is taken as well as when reviewing all the images after a shoot.

The 20D seems to fall around the middle of these two performance wise which is a surprise to me. Until now I never looked up the numbers so I didn't realize the 20D performed better than the 10D as concerns reading/writing to the CF cards.

Sebastian, do you have a 20D? I might want to see how it performs first hand. I'm always up for saving money I'm not convinced about the auto-focus however.

[Trevor Ash]

I want to make sure that those of you giving me advice aren't focusing on things that aren't actually important to me. I really do want all of your advice and am in no hurry of purchasing anything.

I took my initial list of "good things" about the 1D MKII and condensed it to only the items that are reallt important to me. I hope this will help focus the conversations and advice. But please do mention anything that hasn't been mentioned yet (like noise quality, etc.)

1. Bigger and brighter viewfinder�.(98% fov)I have a hard time focusing with the 10D at many times
2. Better auto-focus. I can't even use the autofocus on the 10D
7. 1.3x instead of 1.6x crop factor. Perhaps my fisheye will fit?
13. 45 autofocus points
14. Spot meter (2.4%)
16. Writes to cards MUCH quicker which means pano's could be better quality due to not waiting for RAW's to write and I could potentially bracket each position as well...big feature for me.
17. +/- 3 exposure compensation instead of 2 (including flash)

That's it! Regarding the fisheye. Does anyone know if it'll get cropped with the 1.3x of the 1D? It would be "nice" if it didn't crop it like the 10D does but that's not the reason why I want a lower crop factor....it's just a side benefit.

I liked the 45 autofocus points on the EOS-3 VERY MUCH. Anytime where I knew I wouldn't have the time to focus (like sports/dogs) I'd use all 45 points and the EOS-3 did a good job. Otherwise, I just always had it sent to center focus point only and would focus and recompose.

I also used the spot meter a LOT on the EOS-3 and I suspect that even though the 1D is digital I'd still use it to ensure I don't blow out highlights.......the LCD viewfinder and histogram isn't perfect you know. The spot meter always allowed quick tests and I miss that feature.

Edit: I just added exposure compensation of +/-3 as an important feature. It was less important to me for the ambient than it is flash. I have been pretty frustratd when the +/-2 limit for flash on the 10D and am constantly dialing in -2 hoping for even less but couldn't get it.

[Trevor Ash]

Trevor,

The 20D has better low-light focus and better noise qualities. Unless you need weathersealing and 8fps, I would consider that and use the extra cash for the 70-200IS...

And this is coming form someone who REALLY WANTS a 1D MkII,

I think I just realized that you meant better autofocus and noise qualities than the 10D. That much I've always known. I thought you were comparing it to the 1D.......or were you?

BTW, low light focus has never been a concern of mine. I've never had any complaints in that department. The "accuracy* of focus, when achieved, is where my gripes about the 10D reside.

Everything I'd read has told me that the 1D, when focus is achieved, is dead on to where it should be. It seems to meet people's expectations. I'm looking for info that tells me otherwise. I'm sure the info is out there, I'll continue looking. I just want to get a feel for how much of a problem it is for people.

[Trevor Ash]

I found some noise comparisons here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/page20.asp

Based on this information and the example photos it doesn't seem to be a significant different between the 10D, 20D and 1D MKII. Not enough for me to care aobut anyway.

I should mention that I do like the noise appearance in the 20D and 1DMKII better than the 10D....it looks softer and less "digital" but like I said it doesn't matter that much to me.

Sorry for the millions of posts....I'm just doing research and posting here just in case others are interested.

[racingpinarello]

Trevor,

I would rent the camera before you buy it. For $100 or so, you can make sure it's what you want and it lives up to your expectations.

Loren

[Trevor Ash]

Info about RAW photo reviews compared to 20D as lifted from DPReview.com
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/page12.asp:

"RAW record review of 1.3 seconds (EOS 10D was around 2.3 seconds)"

The RAW record review was a measure of how long it takes when shooting RAW from the point of pressing the shutter until you see the image on the LCD.

It lists the amount of time when reviewing already shot images as about 0.7 seconds for RAW. That seems pretty good as the 10D is about 2 seconds for me. So once again this is a considerable improvement in speed.

Here's a quick and dirty table:

10D 20D 1DMKII
raw record 2.3s 1.3s 1.1s
raw playback 2.0s 0.7s 0.7s
raw file flush 5.4s 3.5s 1.22s

What's extremely interesting here is that the 20D and 1D are identical in everything but how long it takes to flush a RAW file to the card. That's impressive and this is the kind of "assumption" that I was wrong about. I assumed the 1D would be much faster than the 20D.

Now, for any given pano with bracketing I shoot a minimum of 18 RAW images in bursts of 3. So I suppose if I did some math then I can *assume* that it would take roughly 16.2 seconds per scene to flush the data to the card on a 10D and about 3.7 seconds on a 1D. What I need to know is if it matters or not because that's a substantial difference. I know with the 10D I HAVE to wait for the files to be flushed because the buffer gets full so quckly. With the 20D the buffer is larger and it writes a little quicker but is it quick enough?

Stupid cameras I'm sorry I'm subjecting you all to my thought processes All I can say is that the 10D doesn't get the job done in this department. The 20D might and the 1D will.

[another view]

Good advice from Loren about renting one for a day or so, but Calumet is going to want more than $100 for that! I think they have an apply-rent-to-purchase deal though.

It's hard to beat a big viewfinder - I should have let you look thru my S2 which is like looking thru a tunnel, then the 10D won't seem so bad! If it's the best solution to the problem, then it's worth considering.

Signed,
Dying of thirst in Rockford... ;)

Kidding - I'm really more of a four-letter word kind of guy anyway (beer, wine - maybe ginn and vdka).

[PhotoGimp]

I triple dog dare you!!!!! Cause my wife won't let me, and someone has to have one!

[Trevor Ash]

I triple dog dare you!!!!! Cause my wife won't let me, and someone has to have one!

Ha!

Thanks to Sebastian I'm now seriously considering the 20D instead. Let's kick his a$$!!!!

[Lionheart]

Go for it. You will not regret it. I wanted to get the 20D initially but decided not to compromise anything for the sake of cost. Past experience with lenses has taught me that I should get what will not cause regrets long term otherwise I end up buying both the compromise and the ideal. I didn't regret buying my 1DmkII and I use it everyday at the office. I've played some with the 20D (got a few patients who brought theirs in for me to play with.) and while it is a competent camera, it is a toy compared to the 1DmkII. The faster start up time of the 20D is not appreciably noticeable nor necessarily more practical than the 0.8 sec of the 1D. My only complaints are that it draws too much attention when I use it outside the office for personal use and the combined weight of the camera and my "L" lenses gets tiring on the neck and shoulders after a couple of hours.

[Sebastian]

Trevor,

I definitely meant the 20D has better low-light focus than the Mark II, NOT the 10D. The 20D's focus sensor reacts to lower light levels, it will grab focus in areas that the Mark II simply can't. Also check DPReview's noise level results, I remember the 20D edging out the Mark II there as well. Nothing dramatic, but something worth considering, especially for one third the cost.

I have a 10D. A friend's roommate just ordered a 20D but I have no hands-on experience with it yet.

[Trevor Ash]

Well, after much consideration I've decided that the 1D MKII is the camera that meets my needs. But I've also decided that it's not wise for me to purchase it right now. I took my truck into the repair shop and it is becoming a little unreliable. It would be wise for me to put that money towards a new vehicle or repairs.

I'd buy the 20D but I just don't see it worth the effort of spending money just for faster card writes. (that's the only big benefit it would get me). So I've decided to stick it out with my 10D another year or so and I'll re-evaluate then.

Thanks for all the advice everyone!

BTW, I ended up not buying the scotch or the XBox either. I bought a much cheaper bottle I hadn't tried before and borrowed a friends XBox and just bought a few new games for it. Damn, I just saved myself about $5000 between all these things

[paulnj]

Well, after much consideration I've decided that the 1D MKII is the camera that meets my needs. But I've also decided that it's not wise for me to purchase it right now. I took my truck into the repair shop and it is becoming a little unreliable. It would be wise for me to put that money towards a new vehicle or repairs.

I'd buy the 20D but I just don't see it worth the effort of spending money just for faster card writes. (that's the only big benefit it would get me). So I've decided to stick it out with my 10D another year or so and I'll re-evaluate then.

Thanks for all the advice everyone!

BTW, I ended up not buying the scotch or the XBox either. I bought a much cheaper bottle I hadn't tried before and borrowed a friends XBox and just bought a few new games for it. Damn, I just saved myself about $5000 between all these things

WELL.... I can't disagree with your choice to wait, but I do disagree with your choice to NOT BUY photo related gear. I suggest that you buy ANYTHING photo related to cure the itch

[Trevor Ash]

WELL.... I can't disagree with your choice to wait, but I do disagree with your choice to NOT BUY photo related gear. I suggest that you buy ANYTHING photo related to cure the itch

Done! I bought some more junk from really right stuff including the Gitzo 1027 tripod I've been lusting after for the last year or more

Are you happy now?

[paulnj]

Sure am "cranky"

RRS and junk don't go together in a sentence though ;)