Which is the better way to go?

[JohnR]

I do general photography, basically some portraits, some with amateur models, some high school sports ( football / track / soccer)





I have been dying to upgrade my camera to a full frame but I see used IDs MkIII's are about the same price as new Id Mk IV. Are the advantages of the MkIV offset by the somewhat smaller sensor size? Of course one is new and one isn't....





My main lens is a 70 - 200 2.8 IS , the rest of my equipment isn't worth mentioning since I only recently moved to digital from film.





Any opinions?

[HiFiGuy1]

JohnR,


First, welcome to TDP! If I were in your shoes, I think I'd choose the versatility of the APS-H body, which is the 1D Mark IV. The 70-200mm f/2.8 lens you have would give you an effective focal length of 260mm on the long end, which would be good for many sports. The short end would end up with 91mm, which is pretty close to the wider end of the typical portrait range of 85-135mm, based on full frame sensor focal lengths.


The newer body also has a warranty, which shouldn't be short-changed in the discussion. It has a newer focusing system, too, as well as a 10 fps shooting rate if you should ever need it. You can always slow down a 1D but you can't do anything about speeding up a 1Ds.

[Daniel Browning]

Are the advantages of the MkIV offset by the somewhat smaller sensor size?

Sometimes, yes. For example, if your lenses are always long enough (you never crop) and you shoot in ample light (never low light), then the 1Ds3 would give you better image quality, especially for portraits where you don't need the high frame rate.

But for sports, the 1D4's improved performance in low light and smaller pixels would be a big benefit -- the smaller sensor size is usually an advantage in that situation.

By the way, you might consider upgrading your lens as well, if you haven't already. If you can make do without zoom, the 300mm f/2.8 or 200mm f/2 might have a bigger impact on your photography than a body upgrade. Or perhaps with a cheaper body (e.g. 7D). Just an idea.

[Daniel Browning]

The 70-200mm f/2.8 lens you have would give you an effective focal length of 260mm on the long end, which would be good for many sports.


Sorry, but I have a medical condition that compels me to make a correction here. [:D] The "effective focal length" of the 70-200 f/2.8 never changes no matter what body it's on. The "effective focal length" is a term used by Canon Marketing and many others, but it is highly misleading. A better term is "equivalent focal length", as in: "200mm on the 1D4 would give you an angle of view that is equivalent to 260mm on the 1Ds3".