Canon Body advice

[matthew_h]

Afternoon all,

I've been using a 20D for the last few years and I'm still reasonably happy with it but I'm wondering about changing it.

I was looking at a 40D but then thought that maybe a different tack altogether would be to go for a 2nd hand 1D. They seem to go for less than even the 40D now. Now, I know they are older, have less megapixels and will obviously be 2nd hand rather than new but they are a pro body with faster AF etc.

As I mainly shoot stuff that moves, bikes etc, I feel that the AF thing might be a good idea.

Any one got any thoughts on the matter?

[andyparrott]

Or look for a 1d MKII, fantastic camera.

[Luca Brazzi]

andyparrott said:

Or look for a 1d MKII, fantastic camera.

Agreed.

[matthew_h]

The Mk2 is out of budget unfortunately

[stigmundfreud]

less megapixles isnt always a bad thing!

If you have 12mp on a tiny CCD or 6mp on a full frame CCD, I can tell you which will look far greater. OK I know the 1d isn't full frame it is a larger sensor still

dont worry about MP, its the quality of the kit you need to worry about. My mobile phone has an 8mp camera on it but it looks crap compared to an 8mp slr

[matthew_h]

The lack of megapixels doesn't bother me at all. I'm more interested in the improved AF of the 1D compared to the 20/40D. I know that the image quality of the 1D is plenty good enough for most usages.

I also gather that the 1D's sensor gets great colours etc.

This true?

[V6GTO]

You will never regret upgrading to a pro camera, second hand or not, and you will never want to buy a prosumer camera again...at least that is my experience. I went from a 20D (which is a fine camera) to a 1DmarkIIN and love it.
The original 1D takes pictures with a quality all it's own...just search for Matt Watkinson's images (Gravy) and see for yourself.

Martin.

ETA:- Here you go...taken on a second hand 1D
http://www.mattwatkinson.com/portfolio/

Edited by V6GTO on Thursday 3rd January 18:30

[matthew_h]

Did Matt use a 1D? I thought he had a 1Ds when I met up with him.

I'm beginning to come round to the idea of the big body tbh.

[snapper seven]

Yep I agree with Martin, my 20D is now relegated to back up since I bought my new 1DMkIIn just before the MkIII came out (that was a conscious decision by the way).
Compared to the 1D the 20D does feel like a toy now, I find the ergonomics and interface much better on the pro camera and yes the AF is better too. Now that I have a 1D I can't go back. You have been warned, it's a slippery slope but well worth it.

One thing I will say though, it is a very heavy camera, the battery is massive which doesn't help so lugging it around with some quality glass does get a little tiring after a while.

SS

Edited by snapper seven on Thursday 3rd January 18:36

[agent006]

V6GTO said:

You will never regret upgrading to a pro camera, second hand or not, and you will never want to buy a prosumer camera again...at least that is my experience.

It's mine too. I went from a D30 (original) to a 1dMk1 and would recommend it to anyone. My only problems are the extra weight and the shorter battery life.

[V6GTO]

agent006 said:

V6GTO said:

You will never regret upgrading to a pro camera, second hand or not, and you will never want to buy a prosumer camera again...at least that is my experience.

It's mine too. I went from a D30 (original) to a 1dMk1 and would recommend it to anyone. My only problems are the extra weight and the shorter battery life.

Shorter battery life? That's the complete opposite to what I found...even with the battery grip on so it had double the life, the 20D won't last half as long as my 1D.

M.

[agent006]

Battery grip on my D30 lasted about twice as long as my 1d. Quite why canon didn't use Lithium ion batteries in the 1d is beyond me.

[MonkeyHanger]

V6GTO said:

Shorter battery life? That's the complete opposite to what I found...even with the battery grip on so it had double the life, the 20D won't last half as long as my 1D.

M.

Likewise.

I can do a 2 day race meeting with the MK2N and only need the 2nd battery later on Sunday. With the 20D i'd be well into my 3rd set of BP 511a's.

[Luca Brazzi]

I have the 20D, and got the 1D3 last June. Massive difference. Everyone's comments above are correct. If you can get a pro camera, get it.

As for battery life....I've taken over 6000 pics on the 1D3 and there was still 20% battery available.

[Dogsey]

Without any experience of either camera I would have thought that with the advances in technology the 40D is now much closer to the original 1D than some are suggesting, with the benefits of new over secondhand and compatability of batteries (and lenses? Does the 1D take EF-S lenses?) surely that is the better option?

Like I said I've no experience of either body, it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

Edited by Dogsey on Friday 4th January 08:32

[V6GTO]

Dogsey said:

Without any experience of either camera I would have thought that with the advances in technology the 40D is now much closer to the original 1D than some are suggesting, with the benefits of new over secondhand and compatability of batteries (and lenses? Does the 1D take EF-S lenses?) surely that is the better option?

Like I said I've no experience of either body, it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

Edited by Dogsey on Friday 4th January 08:32

Just get one in your mits

M.

[m12_nathan]

Just to add to the confusion didn't Matt borrow a 5D for a shoot and say he thought it was better than a 1d?

[Dogsey]

V6GTO said:

Dogsey said:

Without any experience of either camera I would have thought that with the advances in technology the 40D is now much closer to the original 1D than some are suggesting, with the benefits of new over secondhand and compatability of batteries (and lenses? Does the 1D take EF-S lenses?) surely that is the better option?

Like I said I've no experience of either body, it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

Edited by Dogsey on Friday 4th January 08:32

Just get one in your mits

M.

Good point, well made!



(I'd be happy to get either in my mitts actually! )

Edited by Dogsey on Friday 4th January 09:50

[matthew_h]

Dogsey said:

Without any experience of either camera I would have thought that with the advances in technology the 40D is now much closer to the original 1D than some are suggesting, with the benefits of new over secondhand and compatability of batteries (and lenses? Does the 1D take EF-S lenses?) surely that is the better option?

That is kinda what I am asking tbh. I think it comes down to whether the pro bits of the 1D outweigh the newness of the 40D.

m12_nathan said:

Just to add to the confusion didn't Matt borrow a 5D for a shoot and say he thought it was better than a 1d?

That seems to ring a bell too, although I think it was in comparison to his 1Ds MKII and the main advantage was that he felt the 5d was easier to use whilst still giving images of very similar, if not slightly better, quality.

If I was doing more car shooting for editorial purposes then a 5D would definitely be top of my list but as I am mainly doing mountain bike shooting these days then something a bit faster would be a better bet.

[nick_bbb]

m12_nathan said:

Just to add to the confusion didn't Matt borrow a 5D for a shoot and say he thought it was better than a 1d?

Matt had a 1D, seen here...



He then upgraded to a 1DsMkII and a bucket load of L lenses.

Then he sold the lot and bought a 'blad and some other film gear.

Then he borrowed a 5D for a shoot and said that he thought the colours were better than the 1DsMkII and he generally prefered the images. This was genrally attributed to bigger pixels as there were less but on a full frame sensor size.