Bodies.. 50d or 1d?

A

Ant

Messages
957
Name
Anthony
Edit My Images
Yes
Now, i've been thinking of upgrading my body from the 400d that i haave currently, to a 1dmk2 maybe a mk2n also.

Now, i'm taking sports shots, and i like taking landscape shots also, and for these sports shots, even with reasonably fast glass, (24-70f2.8), i'm getting problems keeping the shutter speed up with ISO maxed out (Even though 1600ISO is rubbish on my 400d. As noisy as a disorganised nursery..). I'm looking for something that could go up to 3200 iso, maybe even up to 6400 with good noise performance.

Now, i really wanted a 1dmk2, as it's weather sealed, awesome AF, built like a brick *****house, 1.3x crop.

But now i've been thinking whether i'd really want a 2nd hand copy of the 1d, or get a brand new 50d, and grip it. Both go to iso 3200 i think, but i'd imagine that the 50d would be better with the newer algorythms.

Now, has anyone upgraded (or downgraded depending on how you think) from a 50d to a 1d, or vice versa, and what were the feelings/reasons why?

Also, what would you guys go for?

And NO, nikon is not an option. :razz:

Cheers :)
 
I bought a brand new 1DMK2n the minute it hit the market and loved everything about it - build quality - feel - weather sealing 45 point AF system, etc etc.

It quickly proved a disappointment for me, as it was beaten hands down for cropping and retaining image quality by the 20D I also had at that time, and I sold it after about 12 months taking a huge hit on the price.

The 20D was replaced by a 40D with a huge leap in image quality over the 20D. I later added a 50D, which with it's 50% more pixels over the 40D, increased image quality and cropping ability substantially further. I'm now replacing the 40D with a second 50D.

The advantage of the 50D is patently obvious for bird photography behind a long lens, but if you're primarily into landscapes and sports, you're unlikely to see the same difference and MAY be better served for action shots by the 45 point AF system of 1DMK2 and the slightly wider FOV of the 1.3X crop sensor.

No easy answer really Ant, the ideal all -round camera still isn't out there, the choice still depends hugely on what you mainly intend to photograph.
 
I went from a 20d to a 1dmk2 none N and found it walked over the 20d in every way, never had a 50d so cant say a lot about it but I have a 40d and again no contest for the 1dmk2 other than high iso's but I use 1 series cameras for the focusing not the high iso's.
 
Hmm. I think i'm going to have to get down the shop and try out a 50d, and find someone with a 1d, and see which performs over a race weekend.
 
shutter speed up??
what kind of sports shots are you taking?

anyway in answer to you question....for me it would be a 1D series every time
 
malla1962 said:
I went from a 20d to a 1dmk2 none N and found it walked over the 20d in every way, never had a 50d so cant say a lot about it but I have a 40d and again no contest for the 1dmk2 other than high iso's but I use 1 series cameras for the focusing not the high iso's.
Click to expand...

I'm the exact same at this and the 1D MKII is in a totally different league,ISO handling in far better AF quicker etc etc,The 1.3 crop is handy at it make wide glass wider but not to handy for long glass
Example: 200 on a 20D - 320mm
200 on a 1D - 260mm

20mm on 20D - 32mm
20mm on 1D -26mm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top