Id mk11n

sworks

sworks

Suspended / Banned
Messages
824
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Been looking at a 40d or 50d but I have been offered a 1d mk11n. I have seen mk2's but never noticed an 'n' can anybody advise?
Thanks
 
larger rear screen i think is the main difference, excellent camera, would always opt for a 1D series over anything else for the weather sealing, build quality faster AF etc.
 
Thanks for the reply, the 1d wasn't even thought of hence I know nothing about them. Are they all 'n' or does this mean something?
 
The "n" version was a mid-life update to the original MkII. The main obvious feature being the larger LCD screen.

Bob
 
So a bridge between mk11 and mk111 sort of. I think this will be better than a 50d. Thanks for the help
 
Its a cracking camera, ive only just got rid of mine. As pointed out it has a bigger screen and can write to both memory cards at the same time. Focus is excellent!
 
The MkII is awesome. Low on pixels and heavy on speed and quality. Way behind the modern crop in terms of high ISO quality but more dependable than a faithful dog.

Very different to the xxD cameras and may not be as suitable to your needs, so take a good long think about what's important to you in your body.
 
dazzajl said:
The MkII is awesome. Low on pixels and heavy on speed and quality. Way behind the modern crop in terms of high ISO quality but more dependable than a faithful dog.

Very different to the xxD cameras and may not be as suitable to your needs, so take a good long think about what's important to you in your body.
Click to expand...

I'm confused now, I have been offered this at a similar price to a new 50d so thought this would be better. I know that makes me seem a bit thick but I suppose I am as I'm quite new to photography. I feel that if I get a 50d I may want to upgrade in maybe 2 years, going to this may last me longer?
 
sworks said:
I'm confused now, I have been offered this at a similar price to a new 50d so thought this would be better. I know that makes me seem a bit thick but I suppose I am as I'm quite new to photography. I feel that if I get a 50d I may want to upgrade in maybe 2 years, going to this may last me longer?
Click to expand...

To be honest if you are new to photography than I would consider a 500D. A 1D camera is out of your league to handle. No offense intended. They are designed for the professional photographer. There are no scene modes, auto modes* or do it for me, do it right modes.

*give or take P, A, S and even they are limited in full auto terms.
 
Having used both in the past I would go for the 1Dmk2n rather than the 50D.
 
I would choose the 1dmk2n over a 50d all the time. Its a personal preference, have you handled both cameras and had a play with them ?.
 
I know that makes me seem a bit thick
Click to expand...

Not at all, it's just that there is quite a lot to be considered.

If you get the MkII it could well be used to hammer down the nails on your coffin before being handed to your great great great grand kids. To put it shortly, yes it will last a very long time. But would you want it to?

It's very hefty, like a photo taking boulder. This is good for some folk but others like compact and light weight.

It has lightning fast auto focus and can rattle off nearly 9 frames per second.

But there will come a day when someone with a cheap bit of plastic tat nect you is shooting a 21 mega pixel file at 6400 ISO, without any noise. Your MkII will be giving you an 8 mega pixel file and at 800ISO, you're pushing it towards the limit.

So it all depends on what you want, the 50D is also a great bit of kit but in a totally different way.
 
King_Boru said:
To be honest if you are new to photography than I would consider a 500D. A 1D camera is out of your league to handle. No offense intended. They are designed for the professional photographer. There are no scene modes, auto modes* or do it for me, do it right modes.

*give or take P, A, S and even they are limited in full auto terms.
Click to expand...

Yes get 500D, and let me know where to get that 1D2N from! :naughty: I can quite happily live without auto, as most other people. In fact, what does that green box do?
 
Thanks for the info, this is exactly what I need to know. I understant the fact I'm a newbie and not that experianced-just thinking it was more kit for the money. Is it really only 8mp and will be at it's limit at 800iso ? I am away from home at the moment so my Internet is via my phone, hense difficult to doy own homework
 
I have the older 1D and Im happy shooting that at 800 ISO I would imagine the 1D2 to go to 1600 really
 
I've used the older MkII at 3200 and had acceptable results, even for prints up to about A4
 
dazzajl said:
Your MkII will be giving you an 8 mega pixel file and at 800ISO, you're pushing it towards the limit.
.
Click to expand...

Sorry but absoloute rubbish!! I used 1dmkIIs at iso 1600 regular but got published work at iso 3200
 
I see plenty of to pros using 1DIIn's on the touchline. They turn out top quality pictures. I'd definitely have one of those over a 50D any day. Plus being a 1 series you'll instantly look very cool indeed.
 
Tobers said:
I see plenty of to pros using 1DIIn's on the touchline. They turn out top quality pictures. I'd definitely have one of those over a 50D any day. Plus being a 1 series you'll instantly look very cool indeed.
Click to expand...

Yep, still see guys using them, I know at least one Action Images guy who uses them and the results are excellent
 
Yup, it's really only 8mp. Still produces good prints at 12x16 and mine has produced many a double page mag spread without breaking a sweat.

The ISO settings are from 100 to 1600, with a high and low setting giving you some sort of computer fudged (I think) 50 and 3200 as well. 1600 is not too pretty by modern standards though.

There is no reason not to have it as a first camera if it does what you want. If the things you shoot are generally in daylight, are moving and you don't need prints bigger than A3 or so, there's little that will beat it.
 
8mp probably would be OK even for A2. All my A3s from 30D and 40D look perfect even looking closely. I am sure A2 is not that much more and would look fine from normal distances. Good lenses and technique are key though.
 
i use a MKIIn and have printed out from a jpg file croped to A2 using the Meduim file size setting. very please with result. in fact the photo get very good commets as it on my wall at work.

wouldnt sell mine for love nor money.
 
I have made my choice and all being well I will get the 1d this week. Thanks for all your comments.
 
Excellent! It's unlikely to dissapoint. :thumbs:
 
Finally, a subject I am probably experienced enough to comment on. I traded my 50D for a 1DIIn a few months ago, although slightly worried it may've been a step backwards, it very much isn't.

If you're after a nice light everyday camera to just hang around your neck don't buy it - it's a big heavy lump of metal which can get in the way on 'sightseeing' type days but it is fantastic at everything I put it through - from motorsport, nature, landscapes and general snaps.

High-ISO leaves a little to be desired compared to the 1DIII and 5DII but is probably on a par with the 40D and 50D.

It's a great camera but certainly not for the faint hearted or inexperienced.

DB
 
1DmkII's are the round and bouncy's :D
I sold my 40D and for a 1DmkII and love it more then anything. I shoot weddings with mine at ISO1600 and the results are nice.
Compared to modern high ISO results, its not the best, but the results are still nice and i only really print up to 12x8 unless requested otherwise.

Didnt they increase the buffer size with the "n" version as well as the screen size?
 
Ross2 said:
i use a MKIIn and have printed out from a jpg file croped to A2 using the Meduim file size setting. very please with result. in fact the photo get very good commets as it on my wall at work.

wouldnt sell mine for love nor money.
Click to expand...

using Genuine Fractals I've printed bridal photos up to 36"x24" and they look great

don't let the 8MPs fool you
 
The IIn is a great camera. If it's not too heavy for you then I'd get it over the 50D any day.

Bare in mind that once you go to 1 series you can never go back. :clap:
 
It is a bit heavy, but an excellent camera. You could do a hell of a lot worse than a decent condition mark IIn.
 
I have a 1dm2n & a 40d if you do a lot of low light shooting the 40d is alot better in low light gyms. for outdoor sports the 1dn is the way to go.
1dn chokes in low light. I have a 1dm2n & a 40d if you do a lot of low light shooting the 40d is alot better in low light gyms. for outdoor sports the 1dn is the way to go
1dn chokes in low light, like high school gyms. the 1dm2n is useless above 1600 iso. Everyone talkes about how the 1dn is a pro body
well the pros are shooting in alot better lighting then we are. The true test is in low lght.
 
So, to sum up...

1. We want to know how you get on with it and,
2. If you don't like it you will find a ready market here. But
3. Above all, we want you to like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top