Canon 5D vs 1DMk2

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

I'm looking to upgrade my body soon and am currently veering toward a 2nd hand 5D or 1DMk2, both of which are a stretch for my meager budget. Both seem to go for around the same price. I know a bit about the 5D but I know nothing about the 1D range really.

I'm not really settled into a type of photography yet, but my main interest at the moment is off camera flash portraits but I also shoot a reasonable amount of equestrian in spring and summer which I sell prints of.

I know if I buy the 5D that the Tokina 11-16 and I think the 55-250IS will have to go. Will they work on the 1D2 as I just love my Tokina!

So what are the pros and cons of both of these bodies? What are they both like with higher ISO's? And am I missing a trick, any others I should consider?

Cheers,
pip

AliB · 31 Oct 2009

Hey Pip, I'm lucky in that I have one of each (Well it's a 1DsII so not a million miles off)

Advantages of the 1 series, Wow where do I start! Faster autofocus is THE biggie. 45 AF points vs 9. And yes the performance really is that far apart. The 1D once it is locked onto a subject tracks with unbelievable accuracy and I can see that, for your equestrian work, that would be one HUGE advantage. As would the frame rate on the 1D.

Then there is build quality, the 5D is no slouch but the 1 series is built like a brick. Weather sealed and the shutter is also rated for a lot more work. Actually, the shutter SOUNDS different on a 1 series.

Because it also has the buttons in place for shooting in portrait mode you don't need to add the grip that you would need to add to the 5D to get that functionality and it's very comfortable to use in portrait orientation.

Battery life. The 1D batteries are huge and I usually shoot all day at a wedding on just one battery, I've never had to change battery yet, despite shooting with lenses that have IS and therefore use power. Can charge two of them at a time using the charger.

Sorry, can't help with the lenses, not really familiar with them but I do know the bodies

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

Ali, thanks for the quick reply! You may have just swayed me. Is the 1D2 reasonable for portraits? And what's it like at higher ISO's?
Thanks
pip

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

Get the 1D Mark II if you want amazing built quality with weather sealing, excellent AF speed and a 100% coverage viewfinder.

If you want image quality, if you like to use "wide-angle" lenses and if you want high iso performance, get the 5D.
I already had both and I can tell you, the files from the 5D are really much better.
There is not a big difference between a 20D and a 1D Mark II in image quality.

Of course if you are a sports photographer or/and if you shoot a lot in extreme weather conditions, you may want to pick the 1D Mark II.

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

Just to add something:

The files from the 5D are even better than those from the 1D Mark III. You also get that extra 3D effect, since the sensor is larger: APS-H vs Full-frame

AliB · 31 Oct 2009

The files from my 1Ds are much better than my 5D!! Far more detail in them. Mind you that IS full frame vs full frame.

I think that for portraits the 5D does a cracking job with skin tones and that's one reason they are so loved by wedding photographers. The 1Ds takes a little more work in PP to get the lovely, amost buttery skin tones that the 5D gets right out of camera.

At high ISO neither is going to stack up alonside the latest offerings but I do shoot quite a lot in low light at f1.8-f2.8 and at ISO 1600 you do get a bit of noise, especially in the blacks as you would expect. I run my files through noise reduction using Nik software and they are OK.

It's the one reason I need to save my pennies to upgrade the 5D to a MkII next year so I can deal with that particular situation as well as I can.

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

AliB, if you shoot in jpeg, you may see some difference in detail, because each camera processes the files in different ways. Shooting RAW you can see the files from the 5D are better than those from the 1Ds. Using high ISO the difference is even larger in my opinion. The files from the 1Ds are slightly noisy from ISO400 and maybe that's make them look more detailed to your eyes.
In my opinion and according to my personal experience, the files from the 5D are smaller, but almost as good as those from a 1Ds Mark II.

I would order the Canon full-frame cameras by this way, regarding image quality:

1Ds < 5D < 1Ds Mark II < 1Ds Mark III = 5D Mark II

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

Thanks both for taking the time to reply Ali and Jim. Reading the your replies, basically they are very different beasts and I need them both! Damn! I'll have to do a bit more reading up I reckon and I'll hit Flickr to look at shots from them both to help me decide.

AliB · 31 Oct 2009

I do shoot RAW Jim and I still much prefer the 1Ds files for detail

Just goes to show how subjective photography is. lol

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

The files from the 5D are even better than those from the 1D Mark III.

I would order the Canon full-frame cameras by this way, regarding image quality:

1Ds < 5D < 1Ds Mark II < 1Ds Mark III = 5D Mark II

Hmm, I'm confused now - unless you're saying that the 1Ds is the best IQ and the 5D2 the worst?

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

AliB said:
I do shoot RAW Jim and I still much prefer the 1Ds files for detail

Just goes to show how subjective photography is. lol

Yes, I totally agree.

Photography and photographic equipment couldn't be more subjective.

EdBray · 31 Oct 2009

Pippy_Neville said:
Hmm, I'm confused now - unless you're saying that the 1Ds is the best IQ and the 5D2 the worst?

No, other way around.

The 1D MkIII is not the same as the 1Ds MkIII.

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

Pippy_Neville said:
Hmm, I'm confused now - unless you're saying that the 1Ds is the best IQ and the 5D2 the worst?

No Pippy.

1Ds < 5D means the 1Ds is worst than the 5D (my personal opinion, of course)
1Ds > 5D would mean that I was considering the 1Ds as a better camera.

AliB · 31 Oct 2009

Pippy_Neville said:
Thanks both for taking the time to reply Ali and Jim. Reading the your replies, basically they are very different beasts and I need them both! Damn! I'll have to do a bit more reading up I reckon and I'll hit Flickr to look at shots from them both to help me decide.

lol @ needing both.

I do still use both cameras and spread the workload between them. For hand held off camera flash I like the 5D because I can shoot with a flash in my left hand and the camera in my right, the 1Ds is a bit heavy for that. Also tripod mounted night shots, I will use the 5D because it's so much lighter on a tripod. At weddings I will have the longer lens on the 1Ds and wider on the 5D because focus is more critical with the longer lenses. If I'm shooting wide, chances are I'm shooting with more DOF.

To get a realistic evaluation anything you see on t'internet is not really going to give you it.

If I told you that the files I upload here are less than 1% of the information I get off the 1Ds then that gives you an idea how much is thrown away when we upload to the web.

Have a good look at the reviews of both on something like DP review. I've always found those to be helpful in making these kinds of decisions.

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

EdBray said:
No, other way around.

The 1D MkIII is not the same as the 1Ds MkIII.

Ah, I missed the "s" didn't I? And it's your ad that's making me ask all these questions Ed!!!

jimlizard said:
No Pippy.

1Ds < 5D means the 1Ds is worst than the 5D (my personal opinion, of course)
1Ds > 5D would mean that I was considering the 1Ds as a better camera.

That's what I thought - I forgot to read the "s" so I did!

I'm veering toward the 1D2 - is there much difference between this and the 1Ds2 which we seem to have all been talking about?

Pippy_Neville · 31 Oct 2009

AliB said:
lol @ needing both.

I do still use both cameras and spread the workload between them. For hand held off camera flash I like the 5D because I can shoot with a flash in my left hand and the camera in my right, the 1Ds is a bit heavy for that. Also tripod mounted night shots, I will use the 5D because it's so much lighter on a tripod. At weddings I will have the longer lens on the 1Ds and wider on the 5D because focus is more critical with the longer lenses. If I'm shooting wide, chances are I'm shooting with more DOF.

To get a realistic evaluation anything you see on t'internet is not really going to give you it.

If I told you that the files I upload here are less than 1% of the information I get off the 1Ds then that gives you an idea how much is thrown away when we upload to the web.

WOW!

Have a good look at the reviews of both on something like DP review. I've always found those to be helpful in making these kinds of decisions.

Thanks Ali, appreciated. Will head over to DP later as I have to go out now for a few hours.

jimlizard · 31 Oct 2009

Pippy_Neville said:
I'm veering toward the 1D2 - is there much difference between this and the 1Ds2 which we seem to have all been talking about?

The files from the 1Ds Mark II are much, much better! A world apart.

The full-frame sensor also makes a lot of difference to me.
By the other hand, the 1D Mark II is faster for sports.

Edited: By "faster" I mean it's capable of a higher frame rate.

Hunter87 · 31 Oct 2009

I love my 1D Mark II and i can get away with using ISO 1000 with no major problems!

As mentioned the autofocus is very quick and accurate!

malla1962 · 1 Nov 2009

Pippy_Neville said:
Ah, I missed the "s" didn't I? And it's your ad that's making me ask all these questions Ed!!!

That's what I thought - I forgot to read the "s" so I did!

I'm veering toward the 1D2 - is there much difference between this and the 1Ds2 which we seem to have all been talking about?

had both 1dmk2 and 1dsmk2, the 1dmk2 files are great but not quite as good as the 1ds files but I did find my mk2 files handled high iso's slightly better than my 1dsmk2. If you don't need 8fps I would look for a used 1dsmk2.

artona · 1 Nov 2009

Hi

You mention portraits Pip. This is what I use my canons for. I normally shoot about 600 -1000 images a week. I bought a 5D a few years ago and then earlier this year bought a 1ds mk11. The 5D is now gone and I have added a 1D and a 1D mkII to the group.

The 1D mkII is now the regular camera. The images are superb. The 1D was bought as a passport camera but for anything upto 20x16 is actually the sharpest of the group. You could probably look at logrithams and claim the 1D mkII is sharper but the 1D has a higher contrast which i probably why it looks sharper.

stew

Pippy_Neville · 1 Nov 2009

jimlizard said:
The files from the 1Ds Mark II are much, much better! A world apart.
The full-frame sensor also makes a lot of difference to me.
By the other hand, the 1D Mark II is faster for sports.

Edited: By "faster" I mean it's capable of a higher frame rate.

Thanks Jim, more food for thought.

Hunter87 said:
I love my 1D Mark II and i can get away with using ISO 1000 with no major problems!

As mentioned the autofocus is very quick and accurate!

Thanks Hunter, I'm interested in the focus performance for my equestrian stuff. I'll have a peek at your website & Flickr to see what you're getting.

malla1962 said:
had both 1dmk2 and 1dsmk2, the 1dmk2 files are great but not quite as good as the 1ds files but I did find my mk2 files handled high iso's slightly better than my 1dsmk2. If you don't need 8fps I would look for a used 1dsmk2.

Thanks malla, I'll need to have a look at costs of both too!

artona said:
Hi

You mention portraits Pip. This is what I use my canons for. I normally shoot about 600 -1000 images a week. I bought a 5D a few years ago and then earlier this year bought a 1ds mk11. The 5D is now gone and I have added a 1D and a 1D mkII to the group.

The 1D mkII is now the regular camera. The images are superb. The 1D was bought as a passport camera but for anything upto 20x16 is actually the sharpest of the group. You could probably look at logrithams and claim the 1D mkII is sharper but the 1D has a higher contrast which i probably why it looks sharper.

stew

Interesting Stew, I thought you were strictly a dark side man! If I had the money I would be thinking about a D3 as I just love the tones it produces! Thanks for sharing your findings.

Thanks to everyone who has contributed. I think I've made my mind up to go for a used 1D2 or 1DS2 depending on money. I need to try and get hold of one now to see what they feel like in my hands and make sure I get on with them. And also work out what I can afford in terms of glass as I'll have to get rid of my favourites.
Pip