My most wanted list, anything more to add?

[peety3]

I thought the idea was that the 1D would have lower resolution. 1D and 1Ds would be more like the Nikon D3 and D3x. Hopefully with a similar price ratio...


Nikon has shown that it is possible to make a full frame camera with a pro body that doesn't cost $6000...
<div style="clear: both;"]

</div>


Yep, and Canon has shown the same thing for ~3 years. That's the 5D. It may not be a weatherproofed pro body, but as a single-digit model number it's a pro body.


Think about the heritage of the cameras. The EOS-1 was Canon's pro film bodies. When the EOS-1D came out, making sensors of size was HARD, and the APS-H was probably at the size limits of mass-produced imaging sensors. When they expanded their capabilities to a full-frame sensor, it came with resolution (11MP vs 4MP if I remember correctly) and therefore the limits of image processing meant there was a frame-rate penalty (4fps instead of 8fps). Therefore, they needed two separate models (1D and 1Ds) - why kill the 1D when it worked well for sports shooters, etc.?

[Jon Ruyle]

I should have said "1 series like body"


You're right about canons need for two lines. But even
if they made the 1D full frame, wouldn't they still need two for exactly the same reason? You still can't both the highest
resolution and the highest frame rate.


I'm not a 5D basher. My 5D II is, IMO, the best camera I've owned. But if canon offered a full frame 1 series body for close to the price of a 1D, I would want one.

[Bob]

Canon's goal is to make all SLR cameras full frame. Options will be the number of pixels - yield of the sensor in manufacturing. The 1D is for sports/journalist -higher frame rate (10/sec). 1Ds is all about resolution - studio work.


Ifyou look at the cost of the 5DM2 vs the 1D vs 1Ds, then you see that the 21mp full frame sensor is not driving the 1Ds' cost.

[Jon Ruyle]

Ifyou look at the cost of the 5DM2 vs the 1D vs 1Ds, then you see that the 21mp full frame sensor is not driving the 1Ds' cost.

Which begs the question... what is?

[Colin]

My guess...


It came out earlier.


They sell less of them.


Autofocus points


Weather sealing.


Physical body (vertical grip, more battery?)


Hotness.

[thomas]

Browsing for hours and hours I came up with a very convenient kit for my canon bodies, I was looking for a way to cover a great deal of photography areas, achieve a very good final result, but keep the budget in normal levels without sacrifices in quality (and without thinking of buying an automobile instead). Here is goes:





Canon 17-40mm F/4 L USM - landscape photography - 600E


Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM Macro LensCanon - macro photography 600E


Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens (+1.4 Extender) - my most wanted, for portraits and sports (+the extender for some attempts on wildlife) 1800E (+350E extender)


Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens - I think that this lens is very good to miss, All around 950E


and a 15mm Fisheye 500E





to a total of 4700E

[Jon Ruyle]

True... when you compare the 5D II to the 1Ds III, it looks like all of that stuff is driving the cost. But when you compare the 1D III to the 1Ds III, it looks like the full frame sensor is driving the cost.


Put another way, if all of that stuff adds $4000 to the cost of the 5D II, then how is it that the 1DIII (which has all that stuff) is under $4000? If the full frame sensor adds $3000 to the cost of the 1DIII, how is it that the 5D costs only $2700?


It may be that canon charges what they do for the 1Ds simply because they can. Or maybe it costs more because they sell fewer (though, I think they sell fewer only because it costs more).


Or maybe there is some good reason it costs more to make a 1Ds III than to make a 5D II and a 1D III combined. If so, I don't know what the heck that it is.

[Colin]

the only thing I can rationalize isthat when the 1DS mkIII came out, and the pricing was set, the sensor was far more expensive, and the sales pricewas set basedon minimal manufacturing numbers as well. When the 5DmkII was introduced, making the sensor itself got cheaper and they were going to be making more of them to boot.


I'm reaching...[8-)]

[Colin]

the only thing I can rationalize isthat when the 1DS mkIII came out, and the pricing was set, the sensor was far more expensive, and the sales pricewas set basedon minimal manufacturing numbers as well. When the 5DmkII was introduced, making the sensor itself got cheaper and they were going to be making more of them to boot.


I'm reaching...[8-)]

[peety3]

1Ds3 vs 5D2 is more than just body differences - it's dual-processor vs single-processor, wider/faster data bus to accommodate frame rate, larger buffer, and a large list of feature enhancements. There are plenty of features in the 1Ds3 (and 1D3) that aren't in the 5D series and beyond. And to me, there's just a significant difference in the body that I can feel.