Poll: Who's getting the Canon 1D mkII

Okay, you guys are staring to make me salivate again over equipment. Who's going to buy the mkII. Cast your votes here!

My answer is "no" simply because I can't afford it.

Hi Trevor,

I just sold my Contax and Kodak digital back (for the same price that I bought it), and just bought the Canon Mk2, 16-35, and 70-200 USM IS lens. So it's a clean swap, plus I had enough for two extra batteries, and PhaseOne software.

I know that the Kodak produces better pictures, but the Canon allows me to have a more all around digital wonder for sports, fashion, and kid birthday parties. :)

Loren

NEVER KNOW....I'm quite impulsive :)

I probably will. But I'm not in a hurry. Maybe in the late summer or fall.

"I know that the Kodak produces better pictures..."

I think I know what you mean when you say this, but "better" is probably the wrong word. I assume you mean "more pixels", right?

Not me ... don't need it, and too much Nikon glass to warrant any kind of switch, no matter how good the camera is. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trevor Ash

Okay, you guys are staring to make me salivate again over equipment. Who's going to buy the mkII. Cast your votes here!

My answer is "no" simply because I can't afford it.

---

At the moment my dream is to be able to do more photos of what I see around me in Paris in the subway and in the street and even at the Paris PMA last Monday. The pro photographers on the Canon stand were fascinating - all grey-haired and glasses with great physical presence. They were giving the 1Ds and the 1Dmk2 a serious going-over. I waited for 10 minutes and didn't even get my hands on one. Or any pictures of the other guys. (It is really difficult to do pictures of photographers without them noticing you).

I leave the 1DmkII to them. I'm happier with the Leica.

Charles

I do have my eye on the Nikon D70 though. It's got all of the features I could want for my purposes, and it's definitely at the right price (I'm a college student). I do respect Seb's opinion and reasons for switching to Canon, but in terms of what's available now, for my shooting style and budget, the D70's a clear-cut winner. It would be nice to have some cheaper IS/VR lenses like Canon, but I've already invested in 4 Nikon lenses over the past several years. I'm really about how much of an upgrade a D70 would be over my current setup (N65). I've never even had a spotmeter before. It'll still be a few months before I can afford it, but I'm looking forward to the day.

My Rebel is much lighter and does the job extremely well. I have no urge to upgrade regardless of the cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asylum Steve

"I know that the Kodak produces better pictures..."

I think I know what you mean when you say this, but "better" is probably the wrong word. I assume you mean "more pixels", right?

---

The images from the Kodak digital back are stunning, and extremely accurate. Without seeing the images from the Canon I shouldn't compare. So I shouldn't say better, but I am leaving an excellent camera, digital back, and lens system for something that is very good with more applicable use.

So we'll see, but I am excited to not have to wait for the memory buffer to clear in order to shoot additional images.

Loren

Many people have been asking WHY this camera has everyone buzzing. Simply put, this is the perfect digital SLR. Yes, I said PERFECT. This is the first time that resolution, noise characteristics, sensor size and type all came together to give us one camera for ANY photographer. There are no compromises with this thing, it goes from NFL game to studio without breaking a sweat. It give us a multiplier, but a smaller one so wide angles are still relatively wide. It give us speed and very high quality while at the worst maintaining the quality of our 10D/1D bodies, or even surpassing it.

This is the F5 of digital SLRs, nothing else can beat it, and I doubt anything will catch up for a long time. Nikon's LBCAST is a disppointment at best, and that is the only real competition. Thank God for Nikon, or else Canon would never have had to catch up in such an aggressive fashion and we probably would still be shooting 2mp and making excuses for why we can't crop or go larger than a fuzzy 8x10...

Canon's mentality of giving us choice is something that I am really growing to like, and their behemoth R&D is benefitting us all. Canon shooters because we can use these things, and Nikon shooters because their brand of choice will have to start competing better if they don't want to end up like Olympus, with an overpriced, underpowered system selling itself as professional.

Jeez, this turned itno a rant...sorry. Anyway, am I getting one? Definitely, hopefully by the end of the year if the 10D starts earning its keep. :)

I've been hearing that the anti-alias filter is too strong and negates some of the resolution gain. We'll have to wait and see.

I'd like to get a new Mark II. But $4500.00? OUCH! BIG OUCH!

From what I've read, it seems like it will be a great body. But I've never bought anything when it first came out. I'll wait and see what happens with the new owners, & see what the reviews will be. Then, after I win the lotto, I'll get one. :D

Or perhaps I'll just keep my 10D, and invest in more, better quality 'L' lenses.


OK-I'm jealous!


Kathy

so anybody wants to sell me his used 10D or D100, when you are getting your Mark 2???

i guess this answers the initial question of this thread i am not going to get a Mark 2.
surely would be nice but WAY overkill for me as i am just about to start venturing into the world of digital photography and i am a university student...

Very much want one. Will probably buy one this summer, if I can get hold of one. New Canon products can be very difficult to get hold of.

Of course having bought a dSLR, I'll have to buy a new pc, printer and probably a scanner to scan all my old slides and negatives!