Questions about Canon 5d and 1Ds MKII

[robbins.photo]

Ok, I have a quick question concerning Canon's since I am most definitely NOT a Canon user and need informed opinions concerning this matter. The prices on the 5D and the 1Ds MK II have come down substantially since they are older cameras now, and are within my price range. The reason I am looking at one is because they are full frame sensor cameras and they have the ability to go down to ISO 50. They should be able to give me much higher quality images for landscape work and the odd portrait that I do on occasion over my DX format sensor Nikons. My primary motivation is cost . I will not be buying a huge stable of lenses, it will be one or two at most, again my only motivation for looking at all is the fact that the D700 is still out of my price range and probably will be for a while.

Ummmm, what exactly is *the quick question* you have? You've not actually asked any questions.

So apparently he asked it so quick you missed it. Wow.. that's fast.. lol

 

[jaomul]

I am not sure you are picking the best on your budget. The 5d is a nice camera. I am sure the 1ds2 is nice as well, I had the 1ds and liked it, Mark 2 supposedly steps up everything. You mention landscape and normally this is tripod iso 100 territory. You have Nikon already so what lenses do you have.

If you believe charts the Nikon d3200 will surpass the cameras you mention if the appropriate Lens is used. The Good thing about knowing one specific type of photo you like to shoot is normally you can pick a camera that works well. It's finding one that is good at lots is where it gets difficult. Full-frame normally means better dynamic range and low light performance. Newer crop sensors have better dynamic range specs at low iso than old ff cameras. I recommend do a few comparisons before you buy.

 

[Derrel]

Yes, jaomul kind of hits at what I was trying to show with the DxO Mark test results...since the 5D was current, crop-sensor cameras from Nikon, Sony, and Pentax have seen a major increase in performance, due to the new sensor-manufacturing process that Sony (and Toshiba) have spent hundreds of millions of Yen to implement. So, in many ways, smaller sensor Nikon, Sony, and Pentax cameras have equalled, or surpassed, the image quality standard the 5D set back in the mid-2000's.

The desirability of a mid-2000's era Canon FF body kind of depends on exactly how and what you want to shoot. One thing I find is that FF bodies make the way LENSES perform very different. The 50 goes back to being a "normal" lens; the 85mm becomes an indoor-capable medium telephoto; a 70-200 becomes MUCH more-useful indoors in smaller rooms and in homes and office situations; a 24mm once again becomes a wide-angle lens. Backgrounds are no longer so doggone in-focus and recognizable as they are when using a smaller sensor and a short lens. In cramped shooting areas, FF makes the muslin or seamless paper LESS-recognizable, less-intrusive, when shooting with studio flash at f/stops like f/5.6 to f/8.

APS-C and FX digital are actually two DIFFERENT formats. I think sometimes APS-C is better, and easier to work with. it gives more depth of field per picture angle, and many times that is a huge benefit. At other times, it's NOT a benefit. The view through the viewfinder on FX is also larger, and easier to see, and that can be a plus for many people. But, OTOH, some of the high-end amateur-oriented APS-C cameras have a really NICE, big, high resolution, 3.0- or 3.2-inch rear LCD and live view composing and live-view focusing and focus magnification, for people who shoot that way. The 5D classic has a small, low-resolution, basically CRAPPY rear LCD for review, and no live view, and no video either. No in-built flash, no commander mode, basically a stripped-down $389 EOS Elan body with digital guts.

The EOS 1D Mark II on the other hand is a HIGH-end camera body. It's older, yeah, but it's fast, solid, and for some uses, would still be quite usable. it's a FABULOUS camera...with an older sensor. Sometimes the "camera" part is more important than the "sensor" part.

 

[SamSpade1941]

You make valid points sir, more food for thought.