Help Wanted -- 5D Mark II or 1D Mark IV?

[greggf]

Hi Chris.


Depending on the venue and available light, and of course which lens would you be using? I have taken some great shots using the 5D2 in AI hi-speed(wouldn't really call it hi-speed though!!), but your keeper rate won't be that fantastic because the frame rate being so slow, you jump a little too much between shots. Of course, if you're tracking, and anticipating, and are good at it, you can get some decent shots. The center point does work really well, too. There is a guy on DPreview forums, who swears his 5D2 center locks better than his 1D4 center point in low light....


My personal preference is the 1D4. I try to frame the way I see the shot, thus not having to crop too much. Having 45 points that, once again, as far as I'm concerned, lock all as good as the center point, lends to that task(framing). Plus, the auto-focus is blazing fast on the 4. Especially coupled with the new 70-200 2.8ll(rarely leaves either camera, by the way!!). With the 4 and 10 frames, you could burn shots, trying to get the perfect one....digital is sssoooooo nice!!


Both have great hi ISO, and with today's noise reduction software( I use Nik Dfine 2.0...but looking forward to LR 3 for comparison), I think you have more play in the 1D4 files(especially raw, the only way to shoot, BTW). The 1D4 files just have a LOOK to them, even at hi ISO, with a really good film grain feel.


I think you could survive with the 5D2 if that was you're budget...especially with a couple of fast primes. but the 1D4 would be my choice for that particular situation. Then again, not having used a 7D, that might work, too. I've just read that anything above 1600 or 3200 on the 7D, you really start to push your luck...


GreggF

[Chris White]

Hi Gregg,

Depending on the venue and available light, and of course which lens would you be using?

The light is low at my daughters recital at times. I currently have the 24-70 2.8 L and the 70-200 2.8 for use right away with either body.

I think you could survive with the 5D2 if that was you're budget...especially with a couple of fast primes. but the 1D4 would be my choice for that particular situation. Then again, not having used a 7D, that might work, too.

I realize that the 7D is certainly a step up from my 50D, but the 1D IV is a giant (huge, dare I say) step up. My decision between those two already favors the 1D IV, no offense to the 7D people. It is just that I have a very usable body in the 50D. When I add a second body I want to upgrade as much as possible. The 5D II intrigues me since it is a great full frame sensor at a good price. The trade as Bryan mentions in the review is the slower frame rate and shutter lag. I think with slower action I could work with it. As it is now, I usually shoot at the lower continuous speed on my 50D, which is probably close to the 5D II highest rate.


I am half-way towards the 1D IV so I could pick up the 5D II now, but that would push the 1D IV way back on the acquisition list. I do see the merit in the 5D II and some good prime glass. It is a harder choice when it comes time to pull the trigger than I first thought. I was all 'hot' for the 1D IV when it came out, and certainly covet a 1 series.


Chris

[Chris White]

I want to thank everyone for their thoughts/opinions/experience.


After considering everything I am pleased to report that a 5D Mark II should be in my hands by tomorrow.[]


Chris

[Jon Ruyle]

Awesome! I think you'll love it.

[Chris White]

Awesome! I think you'll love it.



<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

In a word WOW! Me Likey!


I see why <span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]you us 5D II owners love them. This is a center crop from a group photo taken from halfway in the theater with existing lighting. As I crop, obviously I lose some quality, but this is my daughter. I do not have permission from any other parents to put their daughters on a web site and do not know most of them well enough to chance it. But they were moving, my daughter is going up, if you notice her feet are off the ground and skirt drawing down. And this is one of the first of a couple hundred I took, I am sure I will have better as I sort through them.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.60/IMG_5F00_0023crop.JPG[/img]


5D Mark II/EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM 2.8 aperture / 1/400 / 95mm /3200 ISO


Thanks again for your advice. This is going to be a great companion to my 50D. I will have some saving to do before I contemplate the 7D VS. 1D IV question. In the mean time as I get closer, I may stop for a 100-400 L zoom. I can see where it would mount quite nicely to the 5D II.


Chris

[scalesusa]

I sold my 40D and bought a 7D. (I already had a 5D MK II). The 7d just did not get used, so I returned it. I still needed a 2nd body so I found a deal on a used 1d MK III. It gets plenty of use, Its much better for my use than the 7D. I do not have the 1d MK IV, I was planning to get one, but the 1D MK III works well for me, except in the ultra high ISO area, I do not use it beyond ISO 3200.


The 1D low light appears to be just a tad better than the 5D MK II, the sensor has the same pixel density.


I have dropped my plans to upgrade from the 1D MK III to the MK IV due to the problems with AF in low light, its something I use a lot on my 5D MK II.


Images from the sensor should crop very well, its the same density as the 5d MK II, and the 5D crops extremely well.





I'd suggest the 5D MK II, but be aware that it is a bit of a shock going to a FF from a 1.6 crop. You will want longer lenses to get the same field of view, unless you are sticking to wide.

[Chris White]

I'd suggest the 5D MK II, but be aware that it is a bit of a shock going to a FF from a 1.6 crop. You will want longer lenses to get the same field of view, unless you are sticking to wide.

That is why I am going to take a look at the 100-400 L. But, the upside is that my 70-200 2.8 IS will get more use since it now falls in a real sweet spot for me. A lot of times it was a not wide enough, but I wanted more reach that the 17-55 or 24-70 afforded me. Since 70 is now really 70 and not 112, I will be using it a lot where I could not with the 1.6 crop.


Chris