Canon 1D mk2 or 50D?

agent orange

agent orange

Messages
103
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Out of the two what would be your preference for a body for motorsport? Don't say Nikon :wink: much as I'd like one I just cannot get on with them.

I bought a used 1D thinking I'd made a canny purchase but it's been niggling away that I've made the wrong choice.

Beginning to think 50D better or equal in all areas bar weather proofing and tank like qualities.

Am I right?

Cheers
 
The 1d should be more than a match for the 50D even if on paper they look similar. What lenses are you using?
 
One thing to consider is cropping. If you don't have a 400mm plus lens capacity, even more so on an FF body, you might find yourself needing to crop. The 1d is only a 4mp CCD iirc. The 50d holding almost 4 times more resolution will be much more capable if cropping without losing resolution.
 
odd jim said:
One thing to consider is cropping. If you don't have a 400mm plus lens capacity, even more so on an FF body, you might find yourself needing to crop. The 1d is only a 4mp CCD iirc. The 50d holding almost 4 times more resolution will be much more capable if cropping without losing resolution.
Click to expand...

The 1D2 is 8.2MP (it was the original 1D that was 4). Still not as many MP's as the 50D of course but I think I'd still go for a 1D2 for motorsport, mainly for the improved AF and weather sealed body.
 
Last edited:
Canon Eos 1d mk2 everytime,
I have had both and used them for Motorsport, the 50d was sent packing and another 1d mk2 took its place.
Yes the 50d has more pixels, but there not much cop if the AF is not good enough to get that sharp image you require.

Cheers Paul
 
daugirdas said:
What lens are you using? I think that's the key
Click to expand...

Jamtea said:
The 1d should be more than a match for the 50D even if on paper they look similar. What lenses are you using?
Click to expand...

None as yet but looking at

Canon 70-200 f2.8 L non-IS
Sigma 120-300 f2.8

ZoneV said:
The 1D2 is 8.2MP (it was the original 1D that was 4). Still not as many MP's as the 50D of course but I think I'd still go for a 1D2 for motorsport, mainly for the improved AF and weather sealed body.
Click to expand...

Yes as you say the 1D2 is 8.2MP. Interesting you say the AF is better than the 50D. The AF was the really big driver for me getting the 1D - plus it feels SOOO good in the hands. :love:

That said despite everyone saying the AF is so good I've struggled to find documentation that proves the 1D AF is better than the 50D.

lammypaul said:
Canon Eos 1d mk2 everytime,
I have had both and used them for Motorsport, the 50d was sent packing and another 1d mk2 took its place.
Yes the 50d has more pixels, but there not much cop if the AF is not good enough to get that sharp image you require.

Cheers Paul
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response Paul I really appreciate the direct comparison between the 50D and the 1D2. I think that was my concern that the 50D and 1D2 appear, some what simplistically, very similar in spec but the 50D does seem to have a couple of advantages. Higher ISO range and live view primarily. The higher ISO range was the possible clincher.

I think what I need to do is bag a lens and just get out there!!! :)
 
ZoneV said:
The 1D2 is 8.2MP (it was the original 1D that was 4). Still not as many MP's as the 50D of course but I think I'd still go for a 1D2 for motorsport, mainly for the improved AF and weather sealed body.
Click to expand...

My mistake, I just read the first post which just refers to the 1d without seeing mk 2 in the title! (and I was on my iPhone so I couldnt see his kit under the avatar).
 
Last edited:
lammypaul said:
Canon Eos 1d mk2 everytime,
I have had both and used them for Motorsport, the 50d was sent packing and another 1d mk2 took its place.
Yes the 50d has more pixels, but there not much cop if the AF is not good enough to get that sharp image you require.

Cheers Paul
Click to expand...

The 50d AF is more than good enough for motorsport. The 1d2 is better in that aspect, as it should be, but if you can't get sharp results with the 50d you're doing something wrong.

Motorsport photography is what I spend most of my time doing these days and the 50d has been one of the best bodies I've used in a long time.

Lenses have far more bearing on AF anyway.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
The 50d AF is more than good enough for motorsport. The 1d2 is better in that aspect, as it should be, but if you can't get sharp results with the 50d you're doing something wrong.

Motorsport photography is what I spend most of my time doing these days and the 50d has been one of the best bodies I've used in a long time.

Lenses have far more bearing on AF anyway.
Click to expand...

Have to admit the 50D looks a fantastic used buy and my one fear with the 1D2 was the due to its age I was sacrificing image quality and high ISO performance for pure AF performance.

It's interesting what you say because whilst something might be technically better it doesn't always mean its required to do the job. I might have to flick a coin!! :nuts:

There was a new 50D on ebay the other day. £650 Buy It Now - I think I'd rather that than a new 60D. I was sorely tempted and considered putting the 1D2 up for sale.
 
They are both supurb cameras. The AF might be slightly better on the 1d but pair both with a good fast telephoto and the 50d will easily match the 1d in that aspect. The 50d being a crop sensor as well, will give all your telephotos that extra bit of reach. The 50d also has a far better screen, faster processor and a few other bits and bobs, and will generally perform better at high ISOs.

The 1d2 being full frame will ultimately have the edge on IQ, and has a slightly better fast burst rate.

Both are very good for motorsport, its whether the bits and bobs of the 50d, which are simply inherant to a more modern crop camera, are more suited to your needs. I'm guessig the best advice is to try a 50d in the field and compare it directly. I personally found the 50d to be a much better sports body than the 5d mk1, which is the only FF body I've used alongside my 50d.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
The 1d2 being full frame will ultimately have the edge on IQ, and has a slightly better fast burst rate.
Click to expand...
Point of order Mr Chairman. The 1d is an APS-H sensor (1.3x as opposed to the 1.6x of APS-C). It's the 1Ds series that are full frame.



Carry on ;)
 
arad85 said:
Point of order Mr Chairman. The 1d is an APS-H sensor (1.3x as opposed to the 1.6x of APS-C). It's the 1Ds series that are full frame.



Carry on ;)
Click to expand...

Ah ha, I did wonder! Well corrected!

So the 1d2 doesnt have quite the powers I thought it had! :)
 
Wont go far wrong with either, but if you chimp then the 50d has a far better screen.
50d is better in low light
1D2 is weather sealed, and much better built (not saying the 50d is rubbish mind).

Sam
 
I have both, my 50D has let me down in poor weather conditions, my 1D (mk2) hasnt.
1.3 against 1.6 crop - Doesnt make a huge difference to lens reach if using say a 200mm lens. Cropping the 1D would probably give as good results, once again its down to pixel size and the sheer quality of the 1D images (very close to FF) make it a better image (in my view).
The 50D is a nice little camera dont get me wrong but of the 3 cameras we have I would pick them up in order 1D, 5D, 50D.
There are just so many reasons why the 1D is a "better" camera. However as I have said before if you compare it to a 7D the position isnt so clear cut.
Stick with your 1D, enjoy it and re-think the position if or when the 1D fails, I often see recent photos being taken by 1D mk2's and they are very good from a quality point of view, there was never much wrong with the Mk2 and some prefer it over the Mk3 (AF problems) or Mk4 (hugely complex setting it uo, or can be). Basically the Mk2 comes out of the box ready to go to work.

Matt
 
sam_cat said:
Wont go far wrong with either, but if you chimp then the 50d has a far better screen.
50d is better in low light
1D2 is weather sealed, and much better built (not saying the 50d is rubbish mind).

Sam
Click to expand...

Thankfully Wikipedia came to the rescue there.... Tend to chimp with a compact when snapping but never had a luxury of an image review screen with my previous 35mm SLRs. So in a some what masochistic move relearning my SLR skills without a decent screen or live view might not be a bad thing.

It was the low light that performance and seemingly comparable IQ and AF aligned with newer technology that led me to the 50D.

If not already I suspect the 50D will become a stunning used bargain.
 
I had a 1D2 when I did a lot of motorsport work and the AF is noticeably better than the X0D cameras.
 
MatBin said:
I have both, my 50D has let me down in poor weather conditions, my 1D (mk2) hasnt.
1.3 against 1.6 crop - Doesnt make a huge difference to lens reach if using say a 200mm lens. Cropping the 1D would probably give as good results, once again its down to pixel size and the sheer quality of the 1D images (very close to FF) make it a better image (in my view).
The 50D is a nice little camera dont get me wrong but of the 3 cameras we have I would pick them up in order 1D, 5D, 50D.
There are just so many reasons why the 1D is a "better" camera. However as I have said before if you compare it to a 7D the position isnt so clear cut.
Stick with your 1D, enjoy it and re-think the position if or when the 1D fails, I often see recent photos being taken by 1D mk2's and they are very good from a quality point of view, there was never much wrong with the Mk2 and some prefer it over the Mk3 (AF problems) or Mk4 (hugely complex setting it uo, or can be). Basically the Mk2 comes out of the box ready to go to work.

Matt
Click to expand...

Funnily enough I had already identified the 7D as a possible successor if the 1D dies. :naughty:

I heard the 1D was complex but to be honest I've found it very easy to use and the ergonomics are great. Avoiding the custom settings though....
 
Buttkicker said:
1 series camera's are way in front of the 30d 40d 50d etc my 40d is not in the same league in any departement as my 1dmk2N
the autofocus is way better and not even close on the consumer model
Click to expand...

Everything had led me to that conclusion, not least lots of recommendations, but I was unsure whether pro models with 2004 tech would still outperform consumer/pro-sumer models from 2008.

ie. Technology moves fast.
 
Buttkicker said:
1 series camera's are way in front of the 30d 40d 50d etc my 40d is not in the same league in any departement as my 1dmk2N
the autofocus is way better and not even close on the consumer model
Click to expand...

The only reason I sold my 1D Mk2N to buy my 7D was the much higher pixel density because of the cropping I need to do when shooting small birds.

I miss the handling and AF capabilities of the 1D.
 
The AF on the X0D/5D ranges hasn't changed much, it's still the 9 point system. The 1D system hasn't changed much either, it's still the 45 point system. It's only now that the 7 D has come along that there's been a new system.
 
Can't comment on 'Motorsport' but I have had 40D, 50D and 1D Mark 2

I would say a lot depends on how much you need to push the AF system.

Certainly for tracking birds in flight the 1D Mark 2 is in a different league to the 40D and 50D. When using 'like for like' lenses the AI Servo on the 1D Mark 2 locks on and tracks superbly compared to the 40D and 50D which can often loose their target and be left hunting esp in lower light.

'Noise' I would say I've found to be much of a muchness between them.

Cropping is another thing to mention I guess. Not much between the 1.3 and 1.6 sensor although with the 50D you do have those extra pixels so can crop that little more if need be.

Not sure how much value it is to you (I guess it depends on your lenses) but the 1D Mark 2 being able to retain AF at f8 when using teleconverters can come in handy at f4 or f5.6.
 
Last edited:
With regards the cropping, I've been very happy with the images resulting after heavy cropping (8MP image cropped to around 1MP). I've not tried printing them but I dare say if I upsized them in photoshop I could get a decent sized print. Also, I was stunned when the heavily cropped images were sharp - even though the AF point selected was bigger than the target!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top