JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Wed Mar 31, 2004 8:46 am

From SportsShooter.com

Peter Miller is a very acclaimed sports photographer with Sports Illustrated.

* * *

Canon EOS-1D Mark II-A Brief Encounter
By Peter Read Miller, Sports Illustrated

Last week I had the opportunity to shoot with a preproduction EOS-1D Mark II camera for two days at the Pacific Life Tennis in Indian Wells, California. What follows are my totally non-empirical impressions from those two days.

Look and Feel

Physically the camera is essentially the same as the EOS-1D. There is no longer an external window for the Auto White Balance-AWB is done completely inside the camera now. One of my favorite changes is the enlarged CF card door latch. Now you can open it even if you just trimmed your fingernails.

The zoom on the LCD screen is greatŠlogical, simple and very effective. The screen is also brighter that the 1D or 1Ds-making it more important to check the histogram for proper exposure. You can also break the histogram into Red, Green and Blue. There were a number of other changes in the menu system including the option to adjust JPEG compression more precisely.

Function

Auto Focus seemed definitely faster with improved tracking-the result, I am told, of a new processor and improved software. Canon has also worked on improving the on camera flash metering. I just tested it in my hotel room, but again I saw improvement.

The camera has a bigger buffer, and shoots bigger files. Sports Illustrated shoots Raw plus JPEG's so we tend to see rather long buffer write times. The Mark II seemed to take about the same time as the 1D to write the buffer once it was full; however I was getting around 20-8MP files instead of 14-4MP files as on the ID, big difference. Also, I was using a 1gig 32X card. I'm sure things will speed up when the faster cards are available as the camera is designed to take advantage of the higher speeds. In addition, it seemed that you could squeeze off the first few frames as the buffer emptied a lot sooner.

Battery life was much improved-probably double the 1D, and with the same battery and charger. Since I did not have an SD memory card I wasn't able to explore the second card slot feature.

Output
I sent my cards directly to Sports Illustrated in New York, so I really haven't seen the files from the Mark II. My boss Steve Fine, SI's Director of Photography, did look at them. His comments, as we await our shipment of Mark II's, were that "we will be very happy" when the production cameras arrive. The Mark II "will help make the photos in SI look even better". Enough said.

Conclusion
Canon has taken a great camera and made it even betterŠ

(Peter Read Miller is a staff photographer with Sports Illustrated. He is a frequent contributor to the Sports Shooter Newsletter.)
 
Bronko
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2001 3:28 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:25 am

What is the going price of a kidney these days?
Jet City Aviation Photography
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:46 am

www.ebay.com

I'm sure you could find out!

Seriously, yes it is an expensive camera, yet this camera is THE camera for our needs, at least in my opinion. It will definately take away sales from the 1Ds although that camera is not intended for airliner photograhy.

It is a vast improvement over the 10D and 1D, no doubt.

I've got my order in for one. Should come in around mid-April.
I think after I get it, I "might" have an EOS 1VHS for sale. I'm sick
of slides and the scanning problems I've had the past four months. I also think the digital process is MUCH quicker overall.


Jay
 
Riley
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:17 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Wed Mar 31, 2004 11:57 am

Jay, I've got mine on the way as well... You can check out an in-depth review of all the goodies on the Canon USA site. This is a very high-tech piece of equipment. I'm sure the manual that comes with the kit will be huge. Many of the custom functions, etc will almost require formal training.
I'm anxious to see how the 1.3 crop factor compares to the 1.6 10D with my lenses.

RyanU
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:52 pm

Well aside from parting with my deposit, I've been preparing for the MkII by studying the 1D and 1Ds manuals - available here

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/customer/manual.html

everything I've read indicates that operation of the Mk II will be very similar, so this could give you a jump start.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:32 am

Never thought about that Colin. Good suggestion.
Although I have an EOS 1VHS, I am sure that there will be a huge learning curve for me, moving to digital.

Heck, I don't even know what White Balance is all about that so many digital photographers and cameras refer to.


Jay
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 4:31 am

Jay, I might be interested in your 1V. Keep in touch when you ever want to sell it.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:15 am

I am sure that there will be a huge learning curve for me, moving to digital

Well at least the camera will be similar in many respects to the 1v, so from a handling and camera operation, much will be familiar which helps (same AF, same metering etc.)

Apart from familiarising yourself with the digital functions of the camera, I think the most important thing to come to terms with is the amount of post-processing required. I wouldn't expect anything to be useable straight out of the camera - the Mk II in particular seems to need a fairly aggressive approach to sharpening, and quite different to one you would use for scanned film.

For this reason, I suggest you shoot RAW from the start - this way you can experiment with processing time and time again without damaging your "original" - plus, in a few months time when you've refined your proceedure and tool kit, you can go back to your early images and bring them up to standard.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:32 am

Jay,

I would agree with Colin. Having never moved from film to digital (I jumped straight into digital, baby!), I would suggest tinkering with RAW, but for a beginner it might be a bit overwhelming. I think it depends on how comfortable one is with a computer and editing. The only problem with starting with RAW is that you might end up sending the camera back in the first week out of frustration! If you feel pretty good about using photoshop and working your way around the computer (you must if you can upload to this site at least!) then you probably are okay with RAW. But most people I know start with jpegs since at least you can enjoy getting your feet wet. Most of the MKII reviews have the sharpening set to "0", and I think if you turn the sharpening up in-camera you might not need much anyways. On the 1D and 1Ds I shot jpegs only when shooting professionally, and I had the sharpening set to a mid-amount, and the images came out perfect for printing. For most everything else I do shoot RAW now. But the bottom line is- do what Colin says and shoot RAW first. If that is too frustrating, then either send the camera to me, or go ahead and shoot jpegs!

-Ken
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 9:14 am

It is my understanding from reading some reviews on this camera is that you can shoot "both" in Raw mode and jpg mode at the same time!! One of the reviews said that wedding photographers would love this option, since they can shoot Raw and then for the jpgs to use for mini-albums or 4x6 prints.

I am "fairly" good with the computer and Photoshop, so I think I can handle that. Just what is the difference between Raw and jpg format though?

I don't think I'll sell my EOS 1VHS just yet............I might find a need to shoot film at some point, but for the life of me, I can't seem to know why after getting this bad boy!!

 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:03 am

Jay - that's correct, the camera can take a RAW and a jpg at the same time (with various size & quality options on the jpg).

RAW is a record of what the sensor recorded, it is not an image until this sensor data is processed. You do the processing on the PC which allows you to select various processing data (eg. colour balance, sharpening - even exposure compensation) to the image after you've taken it. And of course you can reprocess the image again and again to try different settings.

With jpg, the image processing is done in camera - the sensor data is filtered via the in-camera settings and an image is created. This is fine IF you've got everything just right at the time of shooting. But of course in creating the jpg, much of the original sensor data is thrown away, which means if you do find you have to edit the image after the fact (say you got the white balance wrong) you are making corrections to a much smaller data set, with a resulting loss in quality.

Here's a crude way of thinking about it - RAW is like creating a negative, jpg like making a print. Both are fine if the original exposure is spot on, but if you want to make any adjustments, you're much better working from a scanned neg than a scanned print.

I understand you hanging onto the 1vhs ... I hung on to an EOS 3 for a full year after buying the D60. But I never used it!

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:10 am

Thanks Colin for the advanced information. Looks like I'll be shooting in RAW mode for a while  Smile !!

What is White Balance? I hate to ask a question that sounds so stupid but I have no idea what it is...........

Also, I just can't part with my 1VHS. I mean that thing cost $2300.00 brand new and it is a pretty superb camera. Guess I'll use it for my back-up  Smile
Just a very expensive back-up.

So now, I have two Canon EOS 630's for sale........great cameras for film shooters and they do take 5.5 fps............


Jay
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:41 pm

White Balance - you know that with film you had to switch film types or use filters to cope with, say, the differing colour temperatures of tungsten and daylight. Well with digital, the camera has to determine the light temperature to record the colours correctly. In other words, the camera will attempt to establish a setting which will record pure white as white regardless of the type of lighting.

DSLRs incorporate an auto-white balance feature which works pretty well most of the time, but it can get fooled - eg. the warm glow of a sunset might get somewhat neutralised by the auto white balance. Hence cameras also provide a means for you to set the white balance yourself - if for example, you are shooting under studio lights, and you know the colour temperature of those lights, you can simply dial that value into the camera - result, perfect colour rendition.

Of course, unless you happen to carry with you a light temperature meter, it is seldom you know exactly what the correct setting should be in the field - so you use auto, or guess a setting, which will probably provide good results, but results which might be improved on. By shooting RAW, you can reset the white balance when you get back home to provide the optimum colours.

I know it will be hard to part with the 1VHS - but remember, its just an object. I'd be very surprised if that expensive camera doesn't transform itself into an expensive paperweight when you get the Mk II - I certainly wouldn't rush into it, but I would consider transforming the 1VHS into, say, additional L glass a much better use of your original investment!

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:38 pm

Thanks for the explanation Colin...........

Good thoughs about changing the EOS 1VHS for some more L glass.
I already have the 70-200 f-2.8 and the 28-70 f-2.8, the 85 f-1.8 and both the 2x and 1.4x converters. What I'd like to get is the 70-200 f.28 with IS.
I've seen it in action at a trade show and man was I impressed. I think that might be a possibility after a while or just keep my EOS 1VHS for a back-up.
Right now I have a EOS 630 as a back-up..........I also have another one laying in a drawer..........


jay
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 8:08 am

Okay, does anybody have the "exact" date this bad-boy is going to be released? I've got my $$$$ ready to spend !!

Also, what types of flash cards would you recommend? I want fast ones!

Thanks,


Jay
 
fireguy274
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 8:09 am

I emailed B&H in USA here and they said late April....Artie
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 8:45 am

I think "late April" is the party line ... the big question is how many? In other words, if you aren't in the first delivery (and some dealers are saying they only expect to get 2 or 3), how long till the next shipment? I don't think there is any doubt that demand is going to out strip supply for a considerable time.

As to cards - it seems this has almost become a religion with some people (won't use anything except Lexar, Sandisk or whatever). Personally I use Sandisk Ultra and have no complaints - paradoxically, the fact that I did have one fail which was replaced with no hassle actually makes me feel more comfortable with them. But I haven't done any comparison testing.

Actually, due to the enormous buffer of the MkII, I wonder how crtical card speed will be in practice.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 9:31 am

Colin,

Can you explain about the enormous buffer on the Mark II and how critical card speed will be? I am totally new at all of this.

I heard "mid-April" !! I sure hope my camera store gets a bunch of them!


Jay
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 9:51 am

Jay,
What Colin describes as a buffer is basically this. When a digital camera takes a photo, there is a lot of number crunching it has to do to the "file" before it resembles an image. All of the processing (white balance, color space, sharpening, contrast, etc.) need to be done before you "see" it as an image. The it needs to be written (saved) to a media card. This all takes place remarkably fast. But, there is a physical limit to this speed, and when multiple images are taken, they are queued for processing in a memory area called a buffer.

Similar to RAM in a pc or pda, the camera's "buffer" memory accepts the image and basically queues it up to be processed and then written to the storage media (compact flash card). Until that data gets written, it is volatile. If you shut the camera off during that time, you loose the image, just as you would with a pc if you pull the plug before you save your 10 page Word document.

The current generation of cameras (10d, D100) allow for 3 frames per second to be shot, up to 6-9 images at a time. These "files" are then in the buffer and must then be processed and written to the card before any more shots can be taken. This is only a few moments usually, as the camera normally starts processing and writing them as the buffer fills. Usually not a concern, unless you get trigger happy and fill the buffer just before the shot you want presents it self....and your waiting for the card write to finish. Keeping your finger on the shutter usually prevents the camera from turning over control to the write function by keeping it in a "shooting mode". You'll have to read about that as well. There is a display that should tell you the number of shots remaining that can be taken.

The Mk II's buffer is much larger in comparison, and there should be little or no delay caused by a full buffer. In practical use, card write speed is not an issue. There are a few tests that have been done on write speed out there that should not be too hard to find, and will explain it better then I.

Maybe that helps some.

Jeff
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:25 pm

I think the new EOS D Mark II is a beautiful machine, but I have to be frank- i'll take my 10D to any photo shoot someone takes a Mark II and i'm confident that I can achieve similar results 99% of the time. Given the price of the body, i'd be looking at adding to the L collection before going for more megapixels, 45 point autofocus, etc. -the 10D has really handled the toughest situations i've put it through so far, i'm very pleased with it.

JP
ATR Team
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:30 pm

unless you get trigger happy and fill the buffer just before the shot you want presents it self....

Guilty of this more times than I care to admit. Thank god it's the only thing I am premature at...  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

This new camera looks very good to me as well. I have long been desiring a 1Ds for my commercial work, but hell... who has a spare 8 grand laying around? I've used a 1Ds and damn near fell in love with it on the spot.

I am going to keep my eye on the MkII. Could be my next gun.

william
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:40 pm

Hi Joe,

I agree that in most situations the 10D will get as many good shots in the hands of a good photographer, and you did say 99% of the time. I shoot indoor sports professionally, both with my own business and with another outfit in town. Some have tried indoor soccer with the 10D, and others of us have used the 1D... I have used both cameras quite extensively. And while the 10D is a great camera (I have now added one to my stable) it is really not in the same league as the 1D-type camera. I consider myself a decent sports shooter, and yet I get probably 20% fewer keepers with the 10D than with the 1D in situations with fast movement of basketball, hockey, and soccer indoors. In our business we shoot bulk photos (hundreds per game) for the sale, and a camera has to perform as close to flawlessly as possible. Like you said, maybe you could match our 1D performance with your 10D, and if so we'd probably hire you! I agree that for outdoor stuff like planes, and also for portraits, most wildlife, and other things the 10D is a great performer. But I think that once you have been spoiled with one of Canon's "1" digitals, it is hard going back! I have been without my 1D and 1Ds for about a month now since I sold them in anticipation of the 1DMkII, and I have a 10D to hold me over until the MkII arrives, it is indeed a long wait!  Smile Cheers, Joe, I always have enjoyed your aircraft pics and you seem to know how to handle your 10D well.

-Ken
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:51 pm

Ken,
I should have been more specific- I really mean aviation/airport work- for a soccer game, indeed the 10D would lag the pro dslr's. I have the EOS-1VHS so i know what the topline canon machines can produce. Here is a good example, last week I did work for a client here in CLT- inside the airplane with flash, without flash, outside in sun, clouds, action shots of people working around the plane, stills- almost 1.5 gig worth of 10D raws and the results were fantastic. I know I would not need a high end DSLR to achieve these results, instead, i'd go for a 400MM F2.8 IS -yummmy

JP
ATR Team
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:07 pm

Ah- I see, Joe- thanks for the clarification. About the 400 2.8 being "yummmy"... I have long lusted after a long L prime, and after selling selling some gear I did finally get a 300 2.8 IS. I have grown used to the weight of what I thought were big lenses before... if I only knew! And the 300 2.8 is small compared to the 400 2.8. Now that is what you call a serious load! I have yet to take my 300 2.8 to the airport since I can just imagine how quick to cops will be checking me out with a lens even that size. I am now wondering if I should cut back to the 300 f4 instead since I can actually hold it for more than a few minutes at a time. But for sports the 300 2.8 is AWESOME when used with a monopod, and that is why I got it. But for casual stuff it is a beast for sure.

-Ken
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:10 pm

Ken,
I got the 300 2.8 IS last year, that thing is like no other and i shoot at CLT and JFK with it heavily, even with 1.4x and 2x converters- it is a joy to use and i've gotten very used to the weight. When you factor in converters and 960mm F5.6, the cost of the lens is put in perspective.

JP
ATR Team
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:27 pm

One factor for me is selling commercial images to stock agencies. (Not talking aviation here.) Except in certain circumstances, they won't accept 6.3 megapixel images. They require 11 megapixel in the event the desired use is environmental or outdoor graphics. (Big output sizes.)

I know the Mk II isn't 11 megapixel, but it's got more than my D60 and is within my current "starving artist" budget.

william
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:45 pm

William, that is a good point. I used to deal with stock agencies when i was shooting slides only, now I don't deal with them anymore, but i can see them wanting 11MP for the outdoor stuff.

JP
ATR Team
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 6:48 pm

Joe - you make a very good point, and I will confess to a certain amount of simple, unadulterated lust when deciding to buy the MkII. I had been thinking about a big lens as well (the 500 f4), but was worried about how often I would be able to use this lens effectively and decided the rental route better suits me.

However, I would say I have hit the buffer (both literally and figuratively) with the 10D on a few occasions, and having tried the MkII, and discovered how good performance can be, well there's no going back!  Smile

I see the MkII as "evolutionary" rather than "revolutionary", but it does address a number of issues which I believe I need -

- a very fast and accurate AF, and one that works at f8 (important since I love my 300f4 +2x convertor so much)
- spot metering - I had this with my film cameras, and have missed this badly
- amazing high ISO performance - I do a lot of available light photography, and the difference between the MkII and the 10D at ISO 800 is nearly worth the admission price on its own
- that big buffer. My big photo ops are gerenally airshow related, with lots happening very quickly. I have missed many, many shots waiting for the card to write!
- 1.3 crop - I do like the very wide angle shot, and it will be nice to have a camera that makes better use of my 14mm

In combination, I conclude that I will get more good shots (or perhaps miss less) with the MkII - and that's what matters. The extra megapixels I see as a nice bonus, but not the major selling point.

In film terms, I see this camera as the equivalent of moving from an EOS 30 to a 1v.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 11:27 pm

Colin,

I do see the MkII as evolutionary too, but one that hits really close to the sweet spot in many areas. After reading your post, though, I admit it made me wonder if the 1D (mark I) wouldn't serve you just as well for a nice savings? You mentioned that the resolution wasn't a big deal to you. The only thing you are getting that you really need according to your post is excellent ISO 8oo performance, and in real-world prints, the old 1D did very well despite what others or on-screen images might suggest. Did you say that you owned the 1D at some point? If not I'd say it is definitely worth a good hard look. To be honest, the original 1D still has sharper out-of-the-camera images than the 1D MkII from all the samples I have seen, and it goes well beyond its 4MP billing. I have done many side by side comparisons with the 1Ds, and it is amazing how little difference you see, even in 20x30" prints. I'll admit that part of my desire to get the 1D MkII is borne out of camera lust, and I also wanted to simplify by getting one camera that would basically do the job of my two bodies. But I do frequently question that decision. Original 1D bodies are selling for under $2500, and they include the spot metering, AF at f8, a buffer that (virtually) is never filled, and the 1.3x crop, all things you mentioned in favor of the MkII.

I'm sure you have already looked into that as a possibility and still decided on the MkII like many others, but after having some sellers remorse after selling the MkI, I always feel like defending that excellent and sometimes underrated camera.

-Ken
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sat Apr 03, 2004 11:46 pm

Ken - fair comment ... but while the move from 6 to 8mp is not going to be a huge advantage, I'm not sure I'm comfortable with "just" 4mp. But much more to the point is the difference between CMOS and CCD. There is no question that the 1D produces extremely sharp images ... but to my mind they are almost too sharp and have a digital "edginess" which I'm not keen on.

Purely a matter of taste, but since a lot of the shots that will hopefully pay for this camera are portaiture of one kind or another, I do think the CMOS sensor provides the look I'm after.

If I was purely shooting aircraft, the 1D would indeed be worth careful consideration.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:06 am

Colin, I guess it comes down to what you're going to do. I have never in my life done an airshow or much general av. a/c, I dont shoot studio, so for me, while i'd love an MKII, i cant justify it at this time- in the future perhaps, that may change.

JP
ATR Team
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:09 am

Colin,

Seeing that you wanted to do portraiture of some type, too, the MkII makes a whole lot of sense. I do some portraiture and a little landscape, and while the 1D would do a great job at both of those, I agree about the CMOS "look" being better in those categories, and that is one reason I moved toward the MkII myself. Sounds like a great camera for all of us, then!  Big grin Well, I tried, unsuccessfully to convince people to back out of the MkII so I would move up on the list  Big grin

Have fun!

-Ken
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 1:25 am

Joe, Colin and Ken,

Great thread! I shoot everything with my cameras. female models Smile, airplanes, sports, portraits, etc....so I need a camera that can pretty much match all my needs and I think the Mark II will do it.

Just for grins, I went to www.sportshooter.com and looked at some want ads.
I'm not grinning anymore........there are quite a few EOS 1VHS for sale and they are only getting $1000.00 for them. Yikes !! What should I do?

Sell it before the market totally collapses or just keep it as a back-up? I have never been a huge fan of fixed focus lenses such as the 300mm f-2.8 or the 400mm f-2.8. I've tried using them at sporting events and I just can't handle not being able to zoom.

Now if Canon "ever" came up with a zoom up to 400mm and an f-2.8 range, I'd be all over it, but I think due to glass limitations, that will never happen.

My next "L" series lense will be the 70-200 f-2.8 IS. That lense rocks!

Also, Jeff, thank you for your reply and explanation about buffers. All this digital talk is very new to me. Now if they would just ship about 200 of these Mark II's to my camera store, so I can get my hands on one!


Jay
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 2:00 am

Sorry Ken, I'm not relinquishing my place  Smile I must admit I do tend to think of the MkII more as an "affordable" turbocharged 1Ds rather than an upgraded 1D - had funds been available, I would have gone for a 1Ds long ago.

Joe - of course you are right. If the 10D does what you need, there is no point going elsewhere. Its funny ... while "outsiders" would clump all aviation photographers together, in fact, there is a world of difference between what you, I and a dozen other photographers actually do ... and want as equipment. I'm sure many of us make the same mistake when thinking of nature, sport or any other category of photographer.

Jay - I wouldn't panic too much. There will of course be a flurry of selling during the MkII feeding frenzy, but I think this will be a momentary glut on the market. The 1VHS is still one of the very best film cameras you can buy, and more to the point, I suspect it will never be bettered. There are many many people who for all kinds of reasons will not shoot digital, and I would expect the market to stablise in a little while and the 1VHS realise more of its true value. The thing is, if you can afford not to, don't get pressured into selling it off as a bargain. If you're really lucky, Canon maybe Canon will stop making them  Smile

Cheers,

Colin

Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:46 am

Hi Colin,

It isn't a question of whether I can afford to hold on to it or not, I am definately going to hold on to it. Can't beat it for a film camera as you state, and it will be an "awesome" yet heavy back-up for my new Mark II  Smile

Who knows, I still might shoot some slides with it every now and then, if I could just get a decent scanner. My poor HP Photo Smart just SUCKS and it isn't XP compatible.............there is a way around it and it isn't from HP software either.........


Jay
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 6:27 am

The good ol' Photosmart - still got one somewhere. I still remember buying that not so many years ago. My first foray into digital photography of any kind, and I worried about whether it was going to be a waste of money - a passing fad - little did I know what a slippery slope I was getting on  Smile

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 7:16 am

Forget the 10D. I already have a camera as good as the 10D. This will be my next camera (or something similar).
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 8:17 am

Well Maiznblu_757,

What is it? You didn't tell us which camera you own that is good as the 10D.
I'm anxious to know. You left us all hanging by the seat of our pants.....

Colin, the PhotoSmart Scanner is a pretty cool piece of machinery. The part I like about it is that it lets me scan three different ways. Slides, negatives and I "think" up to 5 x 7 prints. The only drawback is that right now, I can't get it to work, plus, for scanning slides, it isn't that great compared to some of the new scanners. Not a chance in heck of getting any slide accepted to this site using the PhotoSmart now. Plus, HP, in my opinion, has extremely LOUSY support for it. Not hardly any support for XP users. If I was not going to get the Mark II, I'd invest in another slide scanner. I just wish there were options like the PhotoSmart has, 3 different film methods. Most just are negative and slide scanners. Or, you can get a flat-bed scanner and they claim to have a good negative/slide scanner also, but I've never heard of any that offer up to Airliner.net results after a scan with a slide........

Enough about my slide scanner problems, I want to talk about the Mark II some more. Have to keep this thread going until I get mine!


Jay
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:22 am

Hey smartguy,

Check my profile and my photo remarks, its not hard.
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:54 am

Jay,
I highly recommed reading this before responding to Maiznblu_757  Big grin:

http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:56 am

Troll? lmao... I think not. That was a good one though. Big grin
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:27 pm

I found this link interesting, and the results posted as far as the MkI is concerned are right in line with my experience. It is here: http://www.rz.unibw-muenchen.de/~j0br0070/1D-Vergleich.jpg

I have not worked with the MkII yet obviously, but the upgrade is not as much an upgrade as it might seem on paper, as these images might suggest. The MkII will be awesome, but I doubt many people will be able to tell in real world prints which is which in most situations. There are probably those thinking they are missing out with the MkII because you can't afford it. To them I would highly suggest if you can afford a 10D now but want a MkII, don't overlook the MkI! Just getting that EOS 1 body is something that is hard to move back from.

I have a 10D only because I need at least one camera that my wife can operate with its "dummy modes", and it serves us well as a dual purpose camera in that way. (I often do wonder if I should have held onto my MkI longer instead of immediately springing for the MkII. Decisions decisions...  Big grin )

And to anyone posting in this thread thinking that a 300D/DRebel is the same as a 10D, think again! D Rebel is not a bad camera, but the 10D is still a step up in my book, as it should be for $500 more.

-Ken
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 1:25 pm

Take a look at the photos taken with a 300D and a 10D... They look exactly the same, that is what counts. The 10D is a great camera, just why pay an extra $500 dollars when you can get a camera equally as good for less?  Big thumbs up
 
planedoctor
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:21 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 1:39 pm

I agree that the image sensor/ quality is the same. But the people who buy the 10D aren't idiots. When I put my 10D in "AI Focus" I am reminded exactly why I didn't buy the 300D instead. Losing control over Servo v one-shot AF may not matter for airliner photography, but it does matter for a lot of other things. I am not going to list all the other differences either. You have a great camera- you can give yourself a big pat on the back! For some of us, though, the cons of the 300D (I won't list them all here) are why we went for the 10D instead. If you can get good images with the 300D for the shooting you do, then you made the right choice for sure!  Smile

-Ken
 
WellHung
Posts: 3299
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:50 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 2:14 pm

I already have a camera as good as the 10D.

 Insane I'm sure it's fine for what you use it for, but only a fool or someone who doesn't know jack about cameras would claim it's "as good." Which one are you?  Insane

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 2:23 pm

Yes it is fine for what I use it for.

I have also heard it is very good for Airshows, Airliner, Bizjets etc... Although I cannot remember utilizing it for this type of thing yet though.  Big grin

The only thing I have heard it isnt good for is wedding photography. Something to do with the Bride laughing at the camera because of a silver finish or something.

I am not knocking the 10D. I almost got one. If the 300D didnt come out I would have a 10D right now. For those of you that are thinking that money was an issue in my decision, it wasnt. I have $3800.00 invested into my setup right now.


Its not what you have its how you use it.

Best regards,
Chad

[Edited 2004-04-04 07:33:16]
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 7:20 pm

Chad,

I am sorry but that is just not true. The MkII is aimed at professional photographers who shoot sports, wildlife, events and other things. You can not tell me with a straight face that you think that the 300D will perform just as good as a 1D in all of these situations. The 1D will litterally blow the 300D out of the water. Even the 1D Mk1 will do that easily.

Just think of the AF that the 1D's have. It is AMAZING! You have no idea what it is like before you have tried it. Metering modes are far more advanced, not to mention the exposure compensation which is a very important function.

Sure, use both as a point and shoot, then they will yield similar results, but that is not what the 1D's are meant for.

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:07 pm

I sure am glad I didn't post the remark that the 300D is just as good as a 10D or even the upcoming Mark II! Talk about open mouth, insert foot.

Chad, is the heat getting extreme from all the flames????

Be proud of your equipment and what you can produce with it, but to stay you already have a camera as good as the 10D, what were you thinking?


Jay
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:48 pm

Easy guys - as I read it, Chad was comparing the 300D to the 10D, NOT the 1D mkI or II  Smile

Is the 300D as good a camera as the 10D? As a total package, no. Can it produce image quality as good as a 10D ? Yes.

The difference is in the ability to capture the image - the 10D offers greater flexibility which means greater creative possibilities. But if this isn't required, there is no point getting one.

Some of the photographic greats have used very simple equipment - sophistication and complexity was seen by some as getting in the way of the photograph. Others have required more - and used it to good effect.

The only thing that really counts is does the camera you currently use inhibit you from taking the shots you want, or fail to deliver the quality you need? If the answer is no, then no change is required.

As for me, the MkII is the camera I've been waiting for (and have described in my wish list) since my first D30 more than 2 years ago. I think (and I hope I'm not proved wrong) addresses all the DSLR issues I've encountered in the last couple of years.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Canon EOS 1D Mark II Review

Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:59 pm

Its not what you have its how you use it.

Sorry, perhaps I misunderstood this oneliner of his. I saw an obvious reference to the 1D Mk1 or II there.

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests