1DS or 10D

Folks

I have a 10D and love it. I am financial at the moment and can afford to
upgrade from my 10D. However, I am very satisfied with all of its features
and am not sure what I will get for the extra bucks I can afford on the 1DS
or even the 1D MK11. I don't really need the extra megapixals as I only
ever print at 8 by 10. I do note that the 1D etc has 45 point focus. Would
this be a real advantage over the 10D for bird photography? I have a few
good L series lenses so don't need to spend the readies on new lenses. In
short, is there a significant difference between the 10D and the 1Ds and 1D
MK11. I will do the normal spin through DPreview, but would like some real
people experience. As always in anticipation.

regards

--
Don From Down Under

From: "Don"

I have a 10D and love it. I am financial at the moment and can afford to
upgrade from my 10D. However, I am very satisfied with all of its features
and am not sure what I will get for the extra bucks I can afford on the 1DS
or even the 1D MK11.

Hi Don,

Probably no real reason to change if you're happy with the 10D and it takes all
the shots you typically run into.

I don't really need the extra megapixals as I only
ever print at 8 by 10.

The extra MP are nice if you have to crop though.

I do note that the 1D etc has 45 point focus. Would
this be a real advantage over the 10D for bird photography?

I borrowed my wife's 10D for a while and did OK with it for birds IF they
weren't flying too fast but I thought it wasn't as good at AF as my EOS-3 film
bodies. Here are some iggle shots I took with it a few months ago ...
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/eagles_digital/ My friend Roger Clark also
has some excellent bird images he acquired with his 10D, mostly of slow-flying
cranes and egrets and herons. Roger just got a Mark II last week though, FWIW


After this eagle trip last February (shooting 2 film bodies with Velvia 100F
and Provia 100F and the 10D) I decided I wanted to go digital but that the 10D
wasn't the answer.

is there a significant difference between the 10D and the 1Ds and 1D
MK11. I will do the normal spin through DPreview, but would like some real
people experience.

I just got back from another trip to Alaska for birds (mostly) and on this trip
I used both a 1D Mark II and a 1Ds (if you're gonna be a bear be a grizzly).
So this is based on shooting a 10D, a Mark II and a 1Ds. Two people in our
group had 10D's so we could compare what we were getting. For birds the Mark
II was a lot better in a few select situations. First, with a 500 f/4 L and a
2x I could still AF while with the 10D you lose AF unless your fastest aperture
is f/5.6. On the web page I link to below many of the images are made with the
2x and AF (and IS). The McKay's Bunting shots on the web page mentioned below
are good examples, where the bird is jittery and quick AF was a blessing.

Most important, the Mark II did MUCH better on birds-in-flight. Here's a link
to some images I shot on the trip ... the 'kittiwake-in-flight' was a shot the
boys with the 10D could handle quite nicely as the kitties are large,
light-colored and fly close by at moderate speeds. But we also had a lot of
chances with puffins in flight and these are small, dark, fast and wary and the
guys with the 10D simply could not track them no matter what in the dim light.
I was successful about 30-40% of the time at locking on them and got shots like
this when the other guys didn't even bother after a while ...
http://members.aol.com/hiltonfotogra.../puff_fish.htm ... this is in
really dim, low-contrast light. Check out the other shots on the page to see
more Mark II and 1Ds images.

As for the 45 points, these are useful at f/5.6 and wider (at f/8 you're
restricted to the center sensor) and I like to select one of them off-center
and place it on the eye of a bird when shooting tight, since putting the AF
point on the body often means the eye is out of focus. I did this with the
Winter Wren image on the web site, for example.

As always in anticipation.

I let people shoot with the Mark II a couple of times on the Pribilofs trip.
First thing they say is "damn it's heavy". Then they see how fast the AF is
and their eyes open wide and they say "niiiiice". Then I tell them to follow a
bird and hold down the shutter and they blast off 20 raw shots in a couple
seconds and they say "damn, I gotta get me one of these!". Later we'd load the
images on the laptop and run them through Capture One and they were sold.

I'd say if you shoot birds in flight or if you need to AF at f/8 (like with an
f/4 lens and a 2x t/c or a f/5.6 with a 1.4x) then it's definitely worth
getting. Otherwise I'd say probably not ...

Bill

From: "Don"

I have a 10D and love it. I am financial at the moment and can afford to
upgrade from my 10D. However, I am very satisfied with all of its features
and am not sure what I will get for the extra bucks I can afford on the 1DS
or even the 1D MK11.

Hi Don,

Probably no real reason to change if you're happy with the 10D and it takes all
the shots you typically run into.

I don't really need the extra megapixals as I only
ever print at 8 by 10.

The extra MP are nice if you have to crop though.

I do note that the 1D etc has 45 point focus. Would
this be a real advantage over the 10D for bird photography?

I borrowed my wife's 10D for a while and did OK with it for birds IF they
weren't flying too fast but I thought it wasn't as good at AF as my EOS-3 film
bodies. Here are some iggle shots I took with it a few months ago ...
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/eagles_digital/ My friend Roger Clark also
has some excellent bird images he acquired with his 10D, mostly of slow-flying
cranes and egrets and herons. Roger just got a Mark II last week though, FWIW


After this eagle trip last February (shooting 2 film bodies with Velvia 100F
and Provia 100F and the 10D) I decided I wanted to go digital but that the 10D
wasn't the answer.

is there a significant difference between the 10D and the 1Ds and 1D
MK11. I will do the normal spin through DPreview, but would like some real
people experience.

I just got back from another trip to Alaska for birds (mostly) and on this trip
I used both a 1D Mark II and a 1Ds (if you're gonna be a bear be a grizzly).
So this is based on shooting a 10D, a Mark II and a 1Ds. Two people in our
group had 10D's so we could compare what we were getting. For birds the Mark
II was a lot better in a few select situations. First, with a 500 f/4 L and a
2x I could still AF while with the 10D you lose AF unless your fastest aperture
is f/5.6. On the web page I link to below many of the images are made with the
2x and AF (and IS). The McKay's Bunting shots on the web page mentioned below
are good examples, where the bird is jittery and quick AF was a blessing.

Most important, the Mark II did MUCH better on birds-in-flight. Here's a link
to some images I shot on the trip ... the 'kittiwake-in-flight' was a shot the
boys with the 10D could handle quite nicely as the kitties are large,
light-colored and fly close by at moderate speeds. But we also had a lot of
chances with puffins in flight and these are small, dark, fast and wary and the
guys with the 10D simply could not track them no matter what in the dim light.
I was successful about 30-40% of the time at locking on them and got shots like
this when the other guys didn't even bother after a while ...
http://members.aol.com/hiltonfotogra.../puff_fish.htm ... this is in
really dim, low-contrast light. Check out the other shots on the page to see
more Mark II and 1Ds images.

As for the 45 points, these are useful at f/5.6 and wider (at f/8 you're
restricted to the center sensor) and I like to select one of them off-center
and place it on the eye of a bird when shooting tight, since putting the AF
point on the body often means the eye is out of focus. I did this with the
Winter Wren image on the web site, for example.

As always in anticipation.

I let people shoot with the Mark II a couple of times on the Pribilofs trip.
First thing they say is "damn it's heavy". Then they see how fast the AF is
and their eyes open wide and they say "niiiiice". Then I tell them to follow a
bird and hold down the shutter and they blast off 20 raw shots in a couple
seconds and they say "damn, I gotta get me one of these!". Later we'd load the
images on the laptop and run them through Capture One and they were sold.

I'd say if you shoot birds in flight or if you need to AF at f/8 (like with an
f/4 lens and a 2x t/c or a f/5.6 with a 1.4x) then it's definitely worth
getting. Otherwise I'd say probably not ...

Bill

I'd go for longer lenses. That will get you a lot more birds than more
focus points. Obviously you'll have to decide for yourself but Canon has
some sweet IS teles.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"Don" wrote in message
...
Folks

I have a 10D and love it. I am financial at the moment and can afford to
upgrade from my 10D. However, I am very satisfied with all of its
features
and am not sure what I will get for the extra bucks I can afford on the
1DS
or even the 1D MK11. I don't really need the extra megapixals as I only
ever print at 8 by 10. I do note that the 1D etc has 45 point focus.
Would
this be a real advantage over the 10D for bird photography? I have a few
good L series lenses so don't need to spend the readies on new lenses. In
short, is there a significant difference between the 10D and the 1Ds and
1D
MK11. I will do the normal spin through DPreview, but would like some
real
people experience. As always in anticipation.

regards

--
Don From Down Under

I'd go for longer lenses. That will get you a lot more birds than more
focus points. Obviously you'll have to decide for yourself but Canon has
some sweet IS teles.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"Don" wrote in message
...
Folks

I have a 10D and love it. I am financial at the moment and can afford to
upgrade from my 10D. However, I am very satisfied with all of its
features
and am not sure what I will get for the extra bucks I can afford on the
1DS
or even the 1D MK11. I don't really need the extra megapixals as I only
ever print at 8 by 10. I do note that the 1D etc has 45 point focus.
Would
this be a real advantage over the 10D for bird photography? I have a few
good L series lenses so don't need to spend the readies on new lenses. In
short, is there a significant difference between the 10D and the 1Ds and
1D
MK11. I will do the normal spin through DPreview, but would like some
real
people experience. As always in anticipation.

regards

--
Don From Down Under