If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|