 Absolutely Fabulous |
| Review Date: December 9, 2004 |
| Reviewer: Waleed A. Alzuhair, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia |
I bought this camera after using the Canon EOS 10D for commercial photography, and I'm really impressed by its performance. If I were to list the top things I like about it, I would say:
- Resolution. The camera (almost) produces A3 @ 300dpi images. That satisfies most advertising needs.
- Wide Dynamic Range. The color tones and wide color gamut help produce amazing images in all color spaces.
- Speed. (1)Startup speed is wonderful, I set the energy saver to shutdown the camera after 1 min of inactivity and it starts up immediately after a lightly touching the shutter release button. (2)The other thing is the 4 fps; I thought it would be too slow for sports, but it's not. (3)Last but not least, AF speed, it's almost instantaneous.
- Built like a tank. The camera's weather seals are also very important to me. I live in a desert environment, so it gets very dusty especially when doing outdoors photography. Of course changing lenses outdoors for me is risky since it's a chance for dust to get into the chamber and then onto the sensor, So be careful.
- Full Frame. The experience of the lenses brings you back to film cameras. The 10D had a x1.6 crop factor (17mm is actually 27.2mm), but with the 1Ds Mark II 17mm is 17mm and that made me utilize the lenses I had better.
I hope I was able to convey some of the joy I'm having with it.. The only bad thing I find in this camera is its price.. But with all things considered, I think it has the value for it. |
comaprison to a 1ds (Mark I)
|
| Review Date: July 20, 2006 |
| Reviewer: John Tilelli MD, Apopka, FL USA |
It seems unfair to compare this camera to a 10D (or 20D or 30D), either favorably or unfavorably. These instruments are good in their own right, but hardly are in the same league as the 1DS Mark II. I have used all three of the xxD's, and an original 1ds body as well. It occurs to me that the folks who are interested in shelling out over 5 grand for a camera already have an idea about what they want, and that some of them are asking if they should trade in their 1ds body for a mark ii. It is to them that I am adressing this review. The remarks, I think will help those who have less experience with the line. Bear with me for the technical jargon and the emphais on Mark I vs II comparison. I want to help the buyer to decide if there really is a reason to spend this kind of money.
First, regarding resolution: you probably won't be able to tell the difference between Mark I and Mark II unless you are doing studio work. An 8x10 image is virtually indistinguishable. Most of us shoot in .jpg mode, and we don't mess with RAW. If you are doing a 17x20 wedding portrait and are working with uncompressed files, the Mark II is superior. I do outdoor work, so 11.6 megapixels is plenty. Finallyl, the quality of the glass makes a big difference (much more than the sensor resolution), so if you are a little strapped for cash, buy a 5D and spend the difference on "L" series lenses, or a used 1DS (Mark I).
Second: Ergonomics. I like the histogram on the Mark II better than the older camera, and appreciate the improved burst performance, and storage times. Small but significant differences. The battery life is way better, and I like that. I can get 700 frames out of a charge in the Mark II and only 200 from the Mark II. Thank you, Canon. Maybe in the next iteration they will do something with the black brick of a charger. I can only hope.
Third: Sensor noise. Most ofthe high-end cameras are CMOS now, and each time we look at a new generation of pictures we are wowed by the decrease in sensor noise at high ISO's. I remember that the we praised the Mark I for the low noise up to ASA 400. For the uninitiated, sensor noise is the random firing of a sensor due to quantum effects, and manifests as sparkle or random changes in pixel color. It is more prominent in low light and high ASA. The Mark I is great up to ASA 400, good up to 800 and needs some digital filtering at 1200. The Mark II is really good up to ASA 1600, and with a Photoshop filter is good to 3200. If you shoot in low light, the Mark II is for you.
Fourth: Color balance. I always loved the warm, saturated pictures that the Mark I gives, so don't get me wrong - better color rendition is not a reason to sell it for a new model. The Mark II, though, improves on it and gives beautiful color saturation with some improvement in the range of highligts. Digital photo buffs will know what I mean: if you take a picture with broad highlights, like a sky, the foreground objecst will be underexposed. and the highlights clear. Set the exposrue to the foreground, and the sky will be a burnt-out white. The Mark II has improved this much, but it still needs some work by Canon. For now, it helps to have taken a large number of pictures to get an idea as to how to set the exposure.
Fifth: Accuracy of the exposure. The Mark I had an annoying tendancy to overexpose by about a stop. I got used to turning down the exposure 1-2 stops, exposing on the highlights, and using Photoshop to correct the exposure. The Mark II is more accurate, and the Manual exposure is close to the metered exposure.
Sixth: The FF/1.6 business. I really don't see any reason that a 30D is a better camera because a 50mm lens gives an image analagous an 85mm lens in a full frame camera. Be advised, though, that lens evaluations depend on this distinction. Edge performance and flair may be more obvious on a full frame instrument. Both the 1DS and the 1DS Mark II tend to challenge lenses more because they work the full range of the lens from side to side and through the apertures. My 35-135 IS Canon lens gave great pictures on the 10D, but looks washed out on both of the 1Ds's. Before giving the 1DS Mark II a bum rap for less than perfect pictures, ask what lens was used.
Seventh: Price. Presently, a non-grey-market 1DS Mark II sells for around $6899 from reputable dealers. A used Mark I is around half that. I would take a half star away from Canon for the pounding my pocketbook is taking, but I understand that a Mark I was just about the same price when it was released. The price gradient presently would be tolerable for those shooting in low light, or for RAW studio work. Personally, I would buy a Mark I over a 5D for the improved construction.
Finally, some general remarks. I would have liked to compare this fine camera to the comparable Nikon. Unfortunately, I cannot, because all my glass is Canon, and I have no money left for a mult-thousand buck purchase of a Nikon. Maybe someone else would write a review.
My only beefs with Canon have to do with sensor dust, that seems to appear by spontaneous generation, and the steep learning curve that I had with my first use. (Plan on a night or two reading the manual) I guess I can forgive them for not putting a flash in it. Add a couple of hundred to the price for the purchase of a 580EX. Canon service has been terrific. If you have the bucks, quit complaining about the price and get one if you are a serious photographer. Look at the images in dpreview.com (and the long, thoughtful review there), and at fredmiranda.com - they will leave you breathless. This is a serious instrument for serious photographers and far be it from me to give it less than 5 stars for my petty complaints. |
The camera to have...
|
| Review Date: November 26, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Jack Silver, Springfield, MA United States |
As a photo gear junkie, I seem to go through cameras quickly. I buy - use - sell - upgrade... over and over and over. I have used the original digital rebel, the 20D, the 1DMarkIIN, and now the 1dsMKII.
I was originally hesitant to drop the significant chunk of change required to own this product. Especially in the middle of a period of rumors circulating that the next evolution of the 1ds was coming soon. However - it was well worth the money.
I shoot model based images primarly... so I need something that is portable, rugged, and wont die on me - on location.
The battery lasts 8+ hours per charge - and charges incredibly quickly. I bought a spare... but I have only used it on travel weekends when I am away from a power supply for 2-3 days.
Its rugged. There is nothing like the pro-series bodied by Canon. I have taken this camera out in the cold and snow - and in pretty heavy rain - and because of its weather sealing - it worked like a charm.
Noise... this camera can shoot at H - which is the equivalent of ISO 3200. If you need to get the shot - and are in almost pitch black conditions - this baby can handle it. It will be grainy - but its a lot better than almost all of the other cameras out there. (I hear rumors that the 5D is better with LESS grain than this camera)... but then again - this is 16.7 megapixels.
The amount of megapixels is phenominal... 16.7 - allows you to shoot a person and see all of their nosehair. While that may not sound flattering (and its not) - it means that with good glass this baby can capture even the subtlest of details.
Last cool point... the dynamic range.
You figure more digital cameras have a dynamic range of 5-7 stops. Film - 7-9 stops... This has got to have closer to 9 stops and is the BEST I have seen in a digital camera. I just recently got a medium format digital back - and that has 13 stops of dynamic range... but the 1dsmkii comes a heck of a lot closer to that without having to shell out 30k.
|
This is THE 35mm Digital SLR (for at least the next 2 years)
|
| Review Date: December 7, 2004 |
| Reviewer: Timothy M. Dolan Jr., Newport News, Virginia USA |
I recieved my 1DsMkII on 21 Nov 04. My previous digital SLR was a Canon 10D and I have a film based Hassleblad, which I don't use much any more.
So far I can find no camera imposed limitations to my photographs (except I can never have enough resolution). I have full use of my wide angle lenses again. I love this camera.
Some notes: unlike my 10D, the speed of compact flash cards make a huge difference with the 1DsMkII, I recommend at least a 40X or faster, don't use a standard CF card with this camera there is a noticeable speed difference (can you say turtle). My Lexar 40x card seems to do a decent job keeping up with the camera given my normal shooting style, but is still not fast enough to truly keep up with the camera in full continuous mode.
This is not a light camera and the controls take some getting used to coming from the D60/10D realm, but they seem better laid out for my use. Although the manual and autofocus on the camera is noticeably better then my older camera, I upgraded the focus screen (to Ec-b) because my eyes tend to adjust to the lens and I can now manually focus. Upgrading the focus screen was not something I could do with my D60 or 10D and I had problems with manual focus because of this.
This camera takes fantastic pictures. It is near-IR sensitive (although not as much as my 10D), so some near-infrared pictures are possible. For a multi-purpose camera this is THE 35mm camera for all but some sports and photojournalist photographers. In the studio, I am of the opinion, it can replace many medium format film systems as well. Although a bit pricey, it is well worth the money. I highly recommend this camera for the serious photographer. |
Almost perfect
|
| Review Date: April 14, 2005 |
| Reviewer: J. Howard, Midwest |
| I have been shooting digital for four years now mostly with the Kodak DCS cameras(660 through DCSPro). Being a life long Nikon guy it was a big decision to make the switch to Canon and the 1DS MK2. This camera is light years ahead of any Kodak digital slr. I use this camera for studio product, models, location, low light, you name it. The Canon has never produced anything but astounding images for me. All image parameters including sharpness are far superior to any of the old images I have from my Kodak days. Yes it is pricey but if you are working with this camera you will pay for easily long before it's useful days are over. |
|
No video reviews found for this product.
