Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 1Ds2 versus 5D  (Read 56722 times)
alfin
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #100 on: July 14, 2006, 04:42:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Petter,
well performed test! Or as we say in Sweden - snyggt jobbat!

I've always been amused by all the 5D people (I belong to them myself) trying to convince everyone that their camera is as good as the 1DsII. To me it has been very clear since day one that even though differences are small, they are there. You also show that in your test.

Mvh/Lars
Logged

Lars Mollerstrom
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #101 on: July 14, 2006, 07:22:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've always been amused by all the 5D people (I belong to them myself) trying to convince everyone that their camera is as good as the 1DsII. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70718\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't see much of that in this thread. I see it more as an assessment of what the differences actually are (purely in terms of absolute image quality, ie. excluding such factors as superior build quality and more accurate autofocussing etc).

It would be interesting to find out what the Canon marketing people now think of the introduction of the 5D. What impact it has had on the bottom profit line. There can be no doubt that some people, both professionals and amateurs, will have chosen the cheaper option and as a result, Canon will have missed out on a sale of their much more expensive FF model.

On the other hand, there are people like me who have upgraded from a cropped format DSLR, who would not have done so if the 5D had not been on offer. Canon will have lost sales of the 1Ds2 in exchange for sales of the 5D. I wonder what the net effect has been on profit. Are the gains greater than the losses?  This factor will clearly have an impact on future developments.
Logged
saeed.nz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #102 on: July 17, 2006, 11:53:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello to every one as a new comer to this site.

Perhaps this could be a new topic on its own, but it seemed I was approaching the right group of people.

I thorougly enjoyed reading your comments comparing the 5D and 1Ds Mark II. I am about to make a decision on buying one of the two. Although in many ways I am convinced about 5D, it does not appear to accept SD card, which I have been told is a lot faster, bigger and less battery comsuming media for storing data. There are many questions in my mind:
1 Is the battery a problem for 5D?
2 Is it warraned to make a decision based on that factor only?

I'd be greatfull if anyone could shed some light on these questions.

Saeed
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #103 on: July 18, 2006, 09:17:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hello to every one as a new comer to this site.

Perhaps this could be a new topic on its own, but it seemed I was approaching the right group of people.

I thorougly enjoyed reading your comments comparing the 5D and 1Ds Mark II. I am about to make a decision on buying one of the two. Although in many ways I am convinced about 5D, it does not appear to accept SD card, which I have been told is a lot faster, bigger and less battery comsuming media for storing data. There are many questions in my mind:
1 Is the battery a problem for 5D?
2 Is it warraned to make a decision based on that factor only?

I'd be greatfull if anyone could shed some light on these questions.

Saeed
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70983\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The battery life on the 5D is excellent, especially considering its relatively small size.  As for speed differences between CF and SD cards, don't worry about it.  All of the newer cards are quite fast.
Logged

saeed.nz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #104 on: July 19, 2006, 12:36:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Friend of mine has carried out a search on the CF vs SD cards and found out that CF actually does 8mb/s faster than SD. And also that theoretically there is no difference in power usage, however, he beleives 5 pins in SD card vs 20 pin in CF card uses less power. There is also big difference in price of CF cards being more expensive than SD cards. SD cards are smllaer too. He beleives the SD card is the future, as more computers have SD slot allocated but not for CF. I am wondering though why 5D would have only CF option.

PS Thank you Jack for your comments.
Logged
PetterStahre
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40



WWW
« Reply #105 on: July 19, 2006, 03:24:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Friend of mine has carried out a search on the CF vs SD cards and found out that CF actually does 8mb/s faster than SD. And also that theoretically there is no difference in power usage, however, he beleives 5 pins in SD card vs 20 pin in CF card uses less power. There is also big difference in price of CF cards being more expensive than SD cards. SD cards are smllaer too. He beleives the SD card is the future, as more computers have SD slot allocated but not for CF. I am wondering though why 5D would have only CF option.
Seriously, you shouldn't choose between those cameras based on what card is being used. Card readers that can handle either card type will be around at least until your tenth shutter replacement!
Speed or power consumption is not a practical issue either. Start using the 5D and if you feel like it get a vertical grip with an extra battery (which you will come to enjoy anyhow!).

Here's an interesting field report:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=19194770

Seems he had big troubles with the SD cards. He doesn't mention CF but since he's a 1D-series user I suspect he used CF+SD. (Just a guess!)

Could be just that brand of SD cards. Or not?

// Petter

PS. Thank you Lars!
« Last Edit: July 19, 2006, 03:36:47 AM by PetterStahre » Logged
ddolde
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


« Reply #106 on: July 20, 2006, 03:23:34 PM »
ReplyReply

To me these test only show how good the 5D is vs the 1DsII.  

To my eye they are so close that resolution has to be the minor factor in deciding whether one pays $2800 or $6800.  Like the weather resistance and nail driving capabilities of the 1 series body.  It's hard to see how purely in terms of resolution the 1DsII is worth an extra $4K.
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #107 on: July 20, 2006, 05:30:52 PM »
ReplyReply

There is another issue that should be considered.  I think the focusing  mechanism is much better on the 1Dsmk2 than the 5D.  The 5D does not have the 45pt sensor resulting in more misfocused images.  If you add that into the financial equation it would be personal choice if it is worth the difference or not.

Quote
To me these test only show how good the 5D is vs the 1DsII. 

To my eye they are so close that resolution has to be the minor factor in deciding whether one pays $2800 or $6800.  Like the weather resistance and nail driving capabilities of the 1 series body.  It's hard to see how purely in terms of resolution the 1DsII is worth an extra $4K.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71302\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #108 on: July 23, 2006, 09:34:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Mark, I've used both and even using single-point focusing the 1-series seems better. I think they use a more accurate AF system. The extra points don't make it more accurate, per se, just give you greater coverage.

I'd pay another $1K for the 1Ds2 but not $4K! Each to his own.

Ray, thanks for posting the test. Interesting to compare.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #109 on: July 24, 2006, 01:43:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't think so. The d2s was never bought by those of use who can barely afford the upgrade from the 20D to the 5D, and still at it's new street price of around 2875.00 US.

Case in point is that the only reason I moved to the 5D is that of it's much lower street price of 2875.00 from B&H and a 300.00 US mail in rebate from Canon. This put the camera in my target at 2575.00US.

Which brings me to my conclusion. The people who can afford the ds2 and need it's advanced features, such as pixel density and autofocus points, not to mention its bullet proof and sealed body, will continue to buy that model.

I always thought that Canon was making a mistake trying to sell the camera for 3300US. It was too much of a jump and was like, to me, creating a new market that wasn't there. However, there is a market if they get the camera down to 2500 - 2800.00US and I think that was what the rebate was about--to test the viability of a market at that price line. Beforehand, they had the 5D priced way out of reach of the prosumer market and even the semi-pro and low end pro market. (Semi-pro" and "low-end pro" mean those doing or wanting to do professional level photography and those already doing it, such as small portrait studios, and small contract or freelance photographers who have cracked the pro market.)

Thus, if I am right, expect Canon to have effectively covered the entire market sucessfully--except for the very high end 30MP large format digital cameras. They have the Rebel at around 600.00; the 30D around 1400.00; the 5D at around 2900; and the ds2 at around 7, 000US. As you can see, the step up from the 30D to the 5D is going to be for serious photographers, or those who simply have the money and want to pretend they are doing professional photography. (I actually have a friend who knew two people who bought the 1ds2s when they first came out and used them as point and shoot cameras. They only used them several times because they were too bulky. So these types do exist.)

Quote
On the other hand, there are people like me who have upgraded from a cropped format DSLR, who would not have done so if the 5D had not been on offer. Canon will have lost sales of the 1Ds2 in exchange for sales of the 5D. I wonder what the net effect has been on profit. Are the gains greater than the losses?  This factor will clearly have an impact on future developments.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70729\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7950



WWW
« Reply #110 on: July 24, 2006, 09:10:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't think so. The d2s was never bought by those of use who can barely afford the upgrade from the 20D to the 5D, and still at it's new street price of around 2875.00 US.

Case in point is that the only reason I moved to the 5D is that of it's much lower street price of 2875.00 from B&H and a 300.00 US mail in rebate from Canon. This put the camera in my target at 2575.00US.

Which brings me to my conclusion. The people who can afford the ds2 and need it's advanced features, such as pixel density and autofocus points, not to mention its bullet proof and sealed body, will continue to buy that model.

I always thought that Canon was making a mistake trying to sell the camera for 3300US. It was too much of a jump and was like, to me, creating a new market that wasn't there. However, there is a market if they get the camera down to 2500 - 2800.00US and I think that was what the rebate was about--to test the viability of a market at that price line. Beforehand, they had the 5D priced way out of reach of the prosumer market and even the semi-pro and low end pro market. (Semi-pro" and "low-end pro" mean those doing or wanting to do professional level photography and those already doing it, such as small portrait studios, and small contract or freelance photographers who have cracked the pro market.)

Thus, if I am right, expect Canon to have effectively covered the entire market sucessfully--except for the very high end 30MP large format digital cameras. They have the Rebel at around 600.00; the 30D around 1400.00; the 5D at around 2900; and the ds2 at around 7, 000US. As you can see, the step up from the 30D to the 5D is going to be for serious photographers, or those who simply have the money and want to pretend they are doing professional photography. (I actually have a friend who knew two people who bought the 1ds2s when they first came out and used them as point and shoot cameras. They only used them several times because they were too bulky. So these types do exist.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71590\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm with you. I just got my 5D from B&H with the $300 rebate for just the reasons you describe. I wouldn't want the weight of a 1D-series box, nor do I need the extra goodies or weather-proofing (I take reasonable care of my equipment.)

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #111 on: July 24, 2006, 08:02:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't think so. The d2s was never bought by those of use who can barely afford the upgrade from the 20D to the 5D, and still at it's new street price of around 2875.00 US.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71590\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
 

You didn't read my post properly, did you? Having already stated that I'm one such person who would not have upgraded to a full frame format had the 5D not been available, then Canon have clearly not lost a sale of a 1Ds2 to me and others like me.

But I'm sure they have lost sales to both amateurs and professionals who were thinking of upgrading from, say, a 1Ds to a 1Ds2, but who were heistating because of the price and that never-ending upgrade expense, perhaps because their business was not as profitable as they'd like it to be, or because they were just struggling to justify the additional expense but would have eventually relented and bought the camera anyway, as many of us do.

There are also others making a switch from film to digital, or from another digital system to  Canon, who will opt for a 5D in preference to a 30D, so I would say the 5D is robbing sales from both the 1Ds2 and 30D.

In other words, the 5D provides an attractive upgrade path for existing owners of 1.6 crop cameras and an attractive downgrade for some professionals. The net increase in profit for the entire range of Canon DSLRs might therefore not be as great as predicted. On the other hand it might be greater than predicted. These marketing guys can be pretty savvy. It would be interesting to get some statistics.
Logged
dwdallam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2044



WWW
« Reply #112 on: July 27, 2006, 03:21:09 AM »
ReplyReply

What I just noticed after rereading my own post and reading yours is that Canon bodies are coming into the x2 pricing: 600 for the RebelXT, 1400 for the 30D, 2800 for the 5D, and 6800 for the ds2. I think this is intellegent marketing. It offers pricepoints all the way up from the amatuer family photographer wanting to feel like a professional and have a "good" camera (Rebel) to the person who is a serious enthusiast (30D), to those who want to be or are pro or semi pro (5D), and then those that are all pro or just have money to burn (ds2).  

Quote
You didn't read my post properly, did you? Having already stated that I'm one such person who would not have upgraded to a full frame format had the 5D not been available, then Canon have clearly not lost a sale of a 1Ds2 to me and others like me.

But I'm sure they have lost sales to both amateurs and professionals who were thinking of upgrading from, say, a 1Ds to a 1Ds2, but who were heistating because of the price and that never-ending upgrade expense, perhaps because their business was not as profitable as they'd like it to be, or because they were just struggling to justify the additional expense but would have eventually relented and bought the camera anyway, as many of us do.

There are also others making a switch from film to digital, or from another digital system to  Canon, who will opt for a 5D in preference to a 30D, so I would say the 5D is robbing sales from both the 1Ds2 and 30D.

In other words, the 5D provides an attractive upgrade path for existing owners of 1.6 crop cameras and an attractive downgrade for some professionals. The net increase in profit for the entire range of Canon DSLRs might therefore not be as great as predicted. On the other hand it might be greater than predicted. These marketing guys can be pretty savvy. It would be interesting to get some statistics.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71667\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: July 27, 2006, 03:23:23 AM by dwdallam » Logged

saeed.nz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #113 on: August 17, 2006, 03:23:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I have made up my mind to go for a 5D and managed to put a kit together. However, since I have not had direct experience with the equipment, I would like to get some opinion on the combination I have chosen. I would be very grateful to recive some replies. Here it is:

1 Canon EOS 5D Body
2 EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
3 EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
4 Extension Tubes EF 12 II and EF 25 II
5 EF f/2.8 Compact Macro  60mm
6 Filter PLC    
7 Battery + One Extra
8 2X Higher End CF cards 2Gb Pro series
9 Speedlite 580EX
10 Macro Twin Lite MT-24 &/or MR-14 EX
11 AC Adaptor

Cheers
Saeed
Logged
Ronny Nilsen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


WWW
« Reply #114 on: August 17, 2006, 06:28:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have made up my mind to go for a 5D and managed to put a kit together. However, since I have not had direct experience with the equipment, I would like to get some opinion on the combination I have chosen. I would be very grateful to recive some replies. Here it is:

1 Canon EOS 5D Body
2 EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73608\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

When I got my 5D I had to choose between the 24-70 2.8L and the 24-105 4L IS, and i choose the 24-105, as I figured I would get more sharp pictures handheld with the IS lens. I would have bought the 24-70 if the lens most of the time would be used with a tripod, or if the 24-70 also had IS. But this is of course my judgement of my needs and what gives me best quality.  

I have to say that my 24-105 seems to be very good and sharp, but there are people on this board that have had problems with the 24-105.
Logged

jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #115 on: August 17, 2006, 01:48:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
When I got my 5D I had to choose between the 24-70 2.8L and the 24-105 4L IS, and i choose the 24-105, as I figured I would get more sharp pictures handheld with the IS lens. I would have bought the 24-70 if the lens most of the time would be used with a tripod, or if the 24-70 also had IS. But this is of course my judgement of my needs and what gives me best quality. 
This obviously means that we need to meet up and juggle lenses , although my 24-70 isn't a top rate sample optically.

But congrats on the purchase!
Logged

Jan
alba63
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #116 on: August 17, 2006, 02:43:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, here is what I think.
The area where both the 5d and the 1ds II - as far as the samples I have seen show me - are not very strong is smooth highlight detail and DR. I personally would not consider to spend so much more for so little improvement as Petters test show.
Yes in the foliage there are visible differences, but they are still quite small. and we are in heavy pixel peeping mode here. On the screen, 100% view. If the 5d should be not good enough for something, I'd look for more than the 1ds II, a medium format back would probably make a real difference. Not fine detail alone (where tests showed that the difference is only moderate) the general "photographyness", dynamic range, color depth (those Canon all have their cmos look) and creaminess of the tonality transitions.
This would, in my opinion, make more sense than spending 3-4k on some megapixels more.
BTW; if the photograph is really great, noone will care about the fine detail in distant foliage.

regards, Bernie
Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1065


« Reply #117 on: August 17, 2006, 10:44:41 PM »
ReplyReply

the 60mm macro is an S lens for APS size sensor only - the full frame 50mm macro is a fairly old design and requires an extension tube to get to 1:1

in any case, i think the 100 macro is a more generally useful lens because of greater working distance - and if you need even more working distance you can add a 1.4x or 2x extender (although i'd suggest Kenko as the Canon extenders require an extension tube between lens and extender which is a bit of a nuisance and of course doesn't let you focus to infinity)

the ex24 twinlight is much better for bugs, flowers, etc. than the ringlight which is really intended for flat subjects - and really works great with the 100 macro - you can get good handhelds of flowers in a light breeze

the 70-300DO compared to the 70-300 is not economically justified by image quality, but the difference in length makes a surprising difference for travel photogography and "walking around"

i'm a big fan of the IS lenses and think the 24-105 is a better general purpose choice unless you have a specific need for f2.8, e.g. stopping action
Logged
Ronny Nilsen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 340


WWW
« Reply #118 on: August 18, 2006, 03:16:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This obviously means that we need to meet up and juggle lenses , although my 24-70 isn't a top rate sample optically.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73675\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lets do that, I would be very interested to test the 24-70 and the 24-105 side by side.
Logged

saeed.nz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #119 on: August 30, 2006, 01:19:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you very much every one. That is giving me a very good insight about the different combination of lenses on 5D. Since I have been rubbing my eyes for mannnny years to own a decent system, I am opting for the best quality. I am going to use them soon enough and perhaps be able to give you a feed back and post a copule of samples.

Regards
Saeed
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad