DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Canon EOS 1DS mark II
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 43, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/03/2005 10:29:03 AM · #1
I've just bought a Canon EOS 1DS mark II (not for my own money). I haven't receive it yet though.

My boss isn't to happy about me spending so much of the budget on a camera. I just want to be sure I have bought a very good camera. Have anyone heard anything bad about this camera?
 02/03/2005 10:31:30 AM · #2
You spent that much of the company budget without clearing it through the boss first? I hope you are at least a VP.
 02/03/2005 10:31:50 AM · #3
hahahahahahhaha

can i get a job where you work?!?!?!?!

:D
 02/03/2005 10:34:31 AM · #4
yeah, that's like being able to choose a company car and choosing a Lamborghini.
 02/03/2005 10:34:52 AM · #5
OMG... I hope there's room left in the budget for some L glass to go with that sucker! ;o)

Seriously, you really spent that kind of $$$ on a camera without researching it fully to find out if you even NEED that big of a gun?

May I also ask, if you are not a pro photographer, what kind of work your company does that makes an $8000 camera necessary?
02/03/2005 10:39:59 AM · #6
EDIT: (to reflect the original question as opposed to just whining).

It's a FANTASTIC camera

:-)

Message edited by author 2005-02-03 11:41:29.
 02/03/2005 10:44:26 AM · #7
I'm not sure what your work entails, but unless it requires medium format-ish quality I would return the 1DSMKII and get a 20D,1DMKII, or 1DS with a couple L lenses and you will be set for a lot less than $8000 + lenses.
 02/03/2005 10:51:29 AM · #8
As far as the quality of the photos go I have not heard anything bad about the 1Ds Mark II, what I have heard is that this camera takes a fair bit of learning to become proficient at it. The camera is also large and heavy. Without knowing what it is going to be used for it is hard to say if these will be problems or not, it does seem like a lot of camera to buy unless you company is in the business of photography.

A 20D takes fantastic photos and cost a small fraction of the 1Ds Mark II and is much smaller and it is a fairly easy camera to use. You would really have to be doing pro work for this not to be enough for you.
02/03/2005 10:55:20 AM · #9
You bought a 8k camera without doing any research on it? What was your budget? And what do you shoot for work?
02/03/2005 11:00:07 AM · #10
If you don't KNOW you need a camera like that, you don't need a camera like that.

I think you just wasted about $6K.
 02/03/2005 11:37:18 AM · #11
well he does own a d60 and a 300d I would imagine he knows what he was buying. It would help if people sometimes answered the question instead of bitching about how much other people spend on equipment.

And no I have no experience of the camera so I can't answer the question either. I was just meta bitching.
 02/03/2005 11:42:25 AM · #12
Tirpitz has a D60 and a Rebel listed in his profile so he didn't just fall off the turnip truck and buy the most expensive thing he could find. At least he has experience shooting with a Canon DSLR, and presumably some Canon glass available.

There is not a thing about that camera that anyone can point to as a flaw or shortcoming except for the high price. What kind of shooting will you be doing with it?
 02/03/2005 11:47:23 AM · #13
Originally posted by coolhar:

There is not a thing about that camera that anyone can point to as a flaw or shortcoming except for the high price. What kind of shooting will you be doing with it?


It is heavy.
It is big.
It is conspicuous.
It almost requires excellent lenses, as will show up all the flaws in cheaper glass (much more so than a 1DII, or 20D)
It creates huge files, requiring top end computer equipment to process/ manipulate/ store those images.
These huge files will require expensive, large compact flash cards.
It is designed to produce images that require further manipulation to 'finish' them.
It is complex to use, more so than most other Canon cameras (non-1 series).
It'll cost a lot to insure.
If you are interested in long-lens shooting, a 1DII or 20D would probably be more effective than a 1D.

These obviously aren't all 'bad' things, but certainly any camera you are going to pick is a trade-off and dependant on usage.
 02/03/2005 11:54:35 AM · #14
Originally posted by zarniwoop:
well he does own a d60 and a 300d I would imagine he knows what he was buying. It would help if people sometimes answered the question instead of bitching about how much other people spend on equipment.

And no I have no experience of the camera so I can't answer the question either. I was just meta bitching.


I don't really give a crap how much he spent.

If the money is an issue, it would be the smart thing to do some RESEARCH so that you understand the needs and what tool will best address them.

Since his boss evidently is not happy with how much he spent, it would seem that money is indeed an issue. The OP didn't tell us what the camera is going to be used for, but unless he's doing high end work and needs a pro camera, he coupd probably use a 20D and get very good results. If he's doing high end work, he should KNOW that's the kind of camera needed to do the job and wouldn't need to come on here and ask such silly questions.
 02/03/2005 11:59:20 AM · #15
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...and wouldn't need to come on here and ask such silly questions.


woooooah, that's some burn you threw out there.

P.S. let's all have some tea and a hug hahaha

Message edited by author 2005-02-03 12:04:22.
 02/03/2005 12:04:14 PM · #16
In the recent issue of Popular Photography, the MarkII beat out 100 speed film in a quality test!
 02/03/2005 12:04:43 PM · #17
What are these forums for exactly? You could have just igored his 'silly question' and used your clearly valuable time to post on more worthy threads.

Message edited by author 2005-02-03 12:06:19.
 02/03/2005 12:22:37 PM · #18
Originally posted by Mulder:
In the recent issue of Popular Photography, the MarkII beat out 100 speed film in a quality test!


I saw that too. Wasn't it ISO 200? Or maybe a different article. In any case, two different magazines I read on the Mark II said it finally beats 35mm film. I keep seeing a lot of people saying it's equal to or better than medium format. If 16.7 MP is just now barely beating out 35mm, how can it be comparable to a 6x7?

I still think there's a way to go before that happens, but that camera is amazing. And probably way more than you needed. If your boss knows NOTHING about cameras, when the Mark II arrives, show him your camera and tell him it's the one you bought, and take the Mark II home with you.
 02/03/2005 12:29:58 PM · #19
Adding to the excellent points that Gordon made...

Before continuing, Gordon's point re: file size, and their needing powerful a computer to process them, is an extremely important point. After going from a 6 megapixel camera to my current 8 megapixel camera, I noticed that my computer (1.5 Pentium 4, with 1.5 gigs of RAM, running XP Home Edition) felt "a little sluggish" when processing my 8 megapixel files using PS CS.

I've not used the 1Ds MKII, but I own its little brother, the 1D MKII, and can at least speak to the ergonomics and feel of the camera. It's true that it's heavier than the average camera; however, the 1D bodies are well designed, well balanced, and feel secure and solid in one's hands. So, from the tactile department you'll not have any complaints.

In terms of usability, again, I'd say that the learning curve is a little bit steeper when compared to most cameras, given that even the most common of operations (switching ISO, for example) require pressing a combination of buttons and a twist of one of the wheels to make the change. It's in this department where I have some complaints about Canon products as a whole. Having come from a Nikon world, I find their body design to be more user friendly. For example, on the Nikon D100, changing ISO requires pressing one less button, and, often, most operations can be performed by pressing a single button. I know, I know... it's just one more button... nonetheless, it's the little things that make for a friendlier user experience.

Moreover, as others have pointed out, using quality glass is extremely important. Even at 8 megapixels I can tell the difference between pro-sumer lenses and pro lenses -- I can only imagine the sort of noise and distortion that would be recorded at 16 megapixels.

Like others have noted, I'd be interested to read what sort of shooting you'll be doing, to guage whether frames per second ought to be a consideration for you; since the 1Ds MK II shoots 4 frames, where as the 1D MK II shoots at an astonishing 8 frames.

Here's a base comparisons of the three cameras recommended here, courtesy of DPReview.com.


02/03/2005 12:32:59 PM · #20
Originally posted by rscorp:
Originally posted by Mulder:
In the recent issue of Popular Photography, the MarkII beat out 100 speed film in a quality test!


I saw that too. Wasn't it ISO 200? Or maybe a different article. In any case, two different magazines I read on the Mark II said it finally beats 35mm film. I keep seeing a lot of people saying it's equal to or better than medium format. If 16.7 MP is just now barely beating out 35mm, how can it be comparable to a 6x7?

I still think there's a way to go before that happens, but that camera is amazing. And probably way more than you needed. If your boss knows NOTHING about cameras, when the Mark II arrives, show him your camera and tell him it's the one you bought, and take the Mark II home with you.


The 1Ds beats 35mm film, regardless of the film and comes close to MF. The 1Ds Mark II does every bit as good as MF. The confusion comes in when looking only at resolution, for which film counts as just being able to see some detail when the subject is at 100% modulation, not a good way to describe the quality of a photo.
02/03/2005 12:33:47 PM · #21
Originally posted by bdobe:
Having come from a Nikon world, I find their body design to be more user friendly. For example, on the Nikon D100, changing ISO requires pressing one less button, and, often, most operations can be performed by pressing a single button.


i think it's a matter of amateur vs pro....my 10D functions the same as your D100 did - I call those "am" cameras and the 1D a "pro". It's apples to oranges I guess. So it's not Canon in general.
 02/03/2005 12:41:54 PM · #22
I tried telling my boss that we need to buy a 1Ds-MkII for a 'company' camera. He says, "Why do we need a camera? We're a software company." So I said, "Well... you know, pictures 'n stuff... The marketing and sales guys need good pictures of... well... you know, stuff." Needless to say, my boss thinks I'm just a little crazy.


02/03/2005 12:47:18 PM · #23
Do what I did. I bought a camera system for my own use, and when opportunities came up at work I pitched my services. We did some work for a Jack Nicklaus-designed golf course and I ended up getting my photos on the scorecard (that I designed) and the course guide (which I also designed). I'm now able to use the entire system as an income tax deduction.
 02/03/2005 12:47:59 PM · #24
Originally posted by zarniwoop:
What are these forums for exactly? You could have just igored his 'silly question' and used your clearly valuable time to post on more worthy threads.


I could, but then I wouldn't be able to get you all riled up.
 02/03/2005 01:09:21 PM · #25
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
i think it's a matter of amateur vs pro....my 10D functions the same as your D100 did - I call those "am" cameras and the 1D a "pro". It's apples to oranges I guess. So it's not Canon in general.


All right... I didn't wanna get into the old and tired argument of Nikon vs Canon. However, again, I have found Nikon attention to ergonomics and attention to small product details, to be more satisfactory.

Here's another example, my current 580 ex did not come with an omnibounce, it lacks a lip to lock a third party omnibounce to the flash, and the hot-shoe locking mechanism is a simple plastic twist and lock wheel. My previous Nikon SB-800 included an omnibounce, a lip secured the omnibounce to the flash, and the hot-shoe locking mechanism was not a plastic twist wheel, but a lever that locked the flash to the camera.

Again, my experience thus far is that Nikon's ergonomics, and attention to product detail were more satisfactory. That said, I clearly opted to go with Canon after resolving that on the technological end, Canon seems to be faster out of the gate than Nikon. And, belive me, I love my 1D MK II -- it's an awesome camera, and am getting incredible results.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 05:53:45 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 05:53:45 PM EDT.