Canon EOS1DN Mark II or 5D??

TheCheesehead

Hi,

Can anyone weigh in on this? What do you think...the 1DN MII or the 5D...which is the better FF body? Also, Is the EOS 1Dn MII better than the 7D?

Thanks!

ziggy53

Let's start with the name. There is a Canon 1D MKIIN, but there is no 1Dn MKII.

The 1D MKIIN is getting a little old in the tooth, but it still feels very responsive compared to most modern dSLRs. Compared to the original Canon 5D it is a speedster, but it lacks the resolution and DR of the 5D. The 1D MKIIN (or the 1D MKII for that matter) is still a very good sports camera with excellent responsiveness, excellent AF speed and accuracy, and enough resolution for detailed 11" x 14". The 5D is a better landscape platform with more DR and higher resolution. The 1D MKIIN has a smaller imager with a crop 1.3x sensor while the 5D is FF, but they both require FF lenses.

The Canon 7D is the current top of the crop 1.6x Canon sensors and it has a very high resolution and can accept both EF and EF-S lenses (so pretty much anything in a Canon EOS mount). Like the 1D MKIIN, the 7D has 2 image processors to speed up operations including AF and metering. Unfortunately the 7D has ctoss-type AF technology but not the Area-type AF technology of the 1D series cameras. The 1D series is still the best AF of the Canon line. Still it appears that the 7D does really well with AF in good light, and the AF options of the 7D are staggering in number.

There is no "best" of these cameras because they are all designed for different applications. Only the 7D is in current production so a 1D MKIIN or 5D would be used.

How do you intend to use the camera?

TheCheesehead

ziggy53 wrote: »

Let's start with the name. There is a Canon 1D MKIIN, but there is no 1Dn MKII.

The 1D MKIIN is getting a little old in the tooth, but it still feels very responsive compared to most modern dSLRs. Compared to the original Canon 5D it is a speedster, but it lacks the resolution and DR of the 5D. The 1D MKIIN (or the 1D MKII for that matter) is still a very good sports camera with excellent responsiveness, excellent AF speed and accuracy, and enough resolution for detailed 11" x 14". The 5D is a better landscape platform with more DR and higher resolution. The 1D MKIIN has a smaller imager with a crop 1.3x sensor while the 5D is FF, but they both require FF lenses.

The Canon 7D is the current top of the crop 1.6x Canon sensors and it has a very high resolution and can accept both EF and EF-S lenses (so pretty much anything in a Canon EOS mount). Like the 1D MKIIN, the 7D has 2 image processors to speed up operations including AF and metering. Unfortunately the 7D has ctoss-type AF technology but not the Area-type AF technology of the 1D series cameras. The 1D series is still the best AF of the Canon line. Still it appears that the 7D does really well with AF in good light, and the AF options of the 7D are staggering in number.

There is no "best" of these cameras because they are all designed for different applications. Only the 7D is in current production so a 1D MKIIN or 5D would be used.

How do you intend to use the camera?

Thanks Ziggy. I would like to do some sports photography, some portraits with a couple speedlight strobes and softboxes, and maybe a wedding or two during the summer. Thanks!

By the way...what is DR?

ziggy53

TheCheesehead wrote: »

Thanks Ziggy. I would like to do some sports photography, some portraits with a couple speedlight strobes and softboxes, and maybe a wedding or two during the summer. Thanks!

By the way...what is DR?

DR is short for "Dynamic Range" and is an indication of the sensor ability to record and differentiate highlight and shadow detail. A high DR imager is important to accurately record a scene with a broad DR.

For daytime sports either the 1D MKIIN or the 7D should work fine. For night or indoor sports I would prefer the 1D MKIIN for its superior AF speed, accuracy and sensitivity.

For portraits any one of the cameras could work but the 5D should deliver the best tonality and DOF control.

For wedding work I still use a pair of 1D MKII bodies for the ceremony for the exemplary AF. For the formals I use a 5D MKII and for the candids I still like to use a 40D. If I had only 1 camera body to use the 1D MKII/MKIIN could do it all. For reliable indoor AF with either the 5D or the 7D I suggest using an ST-E2 wireless transmitter just for the AF assist light when flash is not allowed. When flash is allowed, almost any flash with an AF assist light should work nicely.

I do think that the 5D has the best ISO 3200 of this group, with the 7D next best and the 1D MKIIN requiring perfect exposure technique and post-processing to reduce noise to make a usable smaller image at ISO 3200. Still the ISO 1600 is very usable on the 1D MKIIN and the ISO 800 can be excellent.

dogwood

Wow -- I couldn't say any of this better than Ziggy put it!

I recently sold my 1D MKIIN mainly because I couldn't justify it alongside my 5D and 5DII. It's an amazing camera and handles better than any camera I've used despite a semi-clunky rear interface compared to Canon's current design. The AF on the 1D MKIIN is stellar too!

But you know? I love my comparatively slow but lightweight 5D too mainly because it's full frame and has plenty of resolution for 99-percent of my work. In the end, the 5D's FF and resolution and picture quality won out over the 1D MKIIN's speed and AF -- for me.

The 7D can shoot video though. I've not shot the 7D but did own a 10D and couple of 20D's (both 1.6 crop) for a while. I think I'm a full-frame guy at this point though. For one, I like f2.8 wide angles and I'm not sure if those are available in the EP-S lenses. And yeah, the MKIIN has a 1.3 crop but the handling more than makes up for that. But neither the 5D or MKIIN shoot video.

This is all a long way of saying you could shoot high-quality photos with any of the cameras you mention-- it really comes down to your personal preferences.

TheCheesehead

Canon EOS1DN Mark II or 5D??
Thanks so much for the replies guys! Would you prefer the 1dMIIN over the 7d for shooting hockey with the 2.8L 70-200?

ziggy53

TheCheesehead wrote: »

Thanks so much for the replies guys! Would you prefer the 1dMIIN over the 7d for shooting hockey with the 2.8L 70-200?

It depends on the venue. If the rink is well lit, like some of the professional rinks, then either will do nicely. If poorly lit and you can use studio flash then I would prefer the 1D MKIIN. If poorly lit and you cannot use flash then both will suffer. For poorly lit and no flash I would recommend the 1D MKIV for its combination of excellent AF in low light "and" very nice high-ISO noise footprint. The 7D has slightly better high-ISO noise than the 1D MKIIN, but the greater resolution may produce nicer prints overall. The AF speed of the 1D series still beats the 7D for indoor sports, and if the shot isn't sharp all the resolution of the 7D does not matter.

If it were me, buying equipment starting with nothing but knowing what I know now, I would get a used 1D MKII and then "rent" a 1D MKIV for the important hockey events. I would use the money saved from the original purchase and purchase a bunch of small flashes with a good radio slave system and set the flashes about the rink to help with light. (Position the lights high and direct or bounce off the ceiling if the ceiling is white or light colored and neutral colored.) Give the 1D MKII/MKIIN enough light for ISO 800 and 1/250th shutter and it can do an excellent job. Of course the same lighting and a 1D MKIV will do even better. The important thing is that the 1D series AF is much better for indoor AF speed and accuracy. (If you can find a good used 1D MKIII it's also a very good indoor sports camera. Just make sure it has a corrected or unaffected AF section.)

The Nikon D700 has a pretty good reputation for indoor AF speed and accuracy and the high-ISO noise is legendary. The Nikon D3 also has excellent high-ISO noise and faster AF speed than the D700 thanks to its dual image processors. You could rent a D700/D3 system to determine suitability.

TheCheesehead

ziggy53 wrote: »

It depends on the venue. If the rink is well lit, like some of the professional rinks, then either will do nicely. If poorly lit and you can use studio flash then I would prefer the 1D MKIIN. If poorly lit and you cannot use flash then both will suffer. For poorly lit and no flash I would recommend the 1D MKIV for its combination of excellent AF in low light "and" very nice high-ISO noise footprint. The 7D has slightly better high-ISO noise than the 1D MKIIN, but the greater resolution may produce nicer prints overall. The AF speed of the 1D series still beats the 7D for indoor sports, and if the shot isn't sharp all the resolution of the 7D does not matter.

If it were me, buying equipment starting with nothing but knowing what I know now, I would get a used 1D MKII and then "rent" a 1D MKIV for the important hockey events. I would use the money saved from the original purchase and purchase a bunch of small flashes with a good radio slave system and set the flashes about the rink to help with light. (Position the lights high and direct or bounce off the ceiling if the ceiling is white or light colored and neutral colored.) Give the 1D MKII/MKIIN enough light for ISO 800 and 1/250th shutter and it can do an excellent job. Of course the same lighting and a 1D MKIV will do even better. The important thing is that the 1D series AF is much better for indoor AF speed and accuracy. (If you can find a good used 1D MKIII it's also a very good indoor sports camera. Just make sure it has a corrected or unaffected AF section.)

The Nikon D700 has a pretty good reputation for indoor AF speed and accuracy and the high-ISO noise is legendary. The Nikon D3 also has excellent high-ISO noise and faster AF speed than the D700 thanks to its dual image processors. You could rent a D700/D3 system to determine suitability.

Thanks again Ziggy! What do you think would be a fair price for a 1DIIN that was used professionaly? Also, just curious...why did Canon make the 1D series with the large bodies that can be held in portrait mode, but the 5D's you have to buy the battery grip? Just wondering....

ziggy53

TheCheesehead wrote: »

Thanks again Ziggy! What do you think would be a fair price for a 1DIIN that was used professionaly? Also, just curious...why did Canon make the 1D series with the large bodies that can be held in portrait mode, but the 5D's you have to buy the battery grip? Just wondering....

I would have to know the condition of the camera, number of actuations, repair history, etc., before I could give a guess as to value. You can look at the used cameras at:

KEH
B&H
Adorama

... and then review the Flea Market on our site as well as Fred Miranda and even completed auctions at EBay to get a pretty good idea of the range of value.

The Canon 1D/1Ds series cameras were "designed" for professional use and represent Canon's top-of-the-line camera system. Besides the built-in vertical grip they also have a cast and machined magnesium body and frame, a very nice water-shed system with o-rings and gaskets, very large (and generally expensive) batteries capable of extreme numbers of shots per charge, and, most importantly to me, the only implementation of "Area-SIR" passive autofocus in the Canon line. Area-SIR is a real advantage and is more sensitive and (potentially) more accurate than the Cross-Based-SIR used on the other cameras in the Canon lineup.

Be aware that a used camera can/will eventually require repairs and that the mirror box and shutter assembly are the components with the most moving parts that are subject to wear and mechanical failure. Replacement costs run $450-$650USD (or so) and that should be considered before purchase.

John Mueller

I made a big mistake when I sold the 1D MK2 N
No comparison to the 7D or 5D MK2. IMHO it's better than the MK3

TheCheesehead

Canon EOS1DN Mark II or 5D??

John Mueller wrote: »

I made a big mistake when I sold the 1D MK2 N
No comparison to the 7D or 5D MK2. IMHO it's better than the MK3

What made it better, picture quality? ISO performance?

John Mueller

TheCheesehead wrote: »

What made it better, picture quality? ISO performance?

AF and image quality. Not so much ISO.

mjpeters

Cheesehead -

Just to clarify - you are aware that the 1D mkIIN is not full frame correct? The 1Ds Mk II is (and costs almost twice what a IIN or 5D would).

Since you threw in sports, in particular hockey in to the mix, the IIN will be a better choice (over the 5D). I've owned three IIN's and three 5D's - and there is no comparison when it comes to AF. So even if the 5D has superior noise characteristics, at least with the IIN you will get the shot. I found the IIN files usable at 3200 if properly exposed. If you underexpose they get ugly quickly.

If you were originally intending to refer to the 1Ds mk II and that is within your budget, I would suggest that a 1D mkIII is a body to consider, especially if you can find one manufactured after all of the fixes. It will run you about the same as a 1Ds II. I like my mkIII better than my 7D or the IIN's that I've owned.

I think the IIN is more bang for your buck over the 7D, unless you really need video or some of the other features (includind less weight). The 7D is nice, but I don't find its AF performance at the same level as the IIN.

TheCheesehead

mjpeters wrote: »

Cheesehead -

Just to clarify - you are aware that the 1D mkIIN is not full frame correct? The 1Ds Mk II is (and costs almost twice what a IIN or 5D would).

Since you threw in sports, in particular hockey in to the mix, the IIN will be a better choice (over the 5D). I've owned three IIN's and three 5D's - and there is no comparison when it comes to AF. So even if the 5D has superior noise characteristics, at least with the IIN you will get the shot. I found the IIN files usable at 3200 if properly exposed. If you underexpose they get ugly quickly.

If you were originally intending to refer to the 1Ds mk II and that is within your budget, I would suggest that a 1D mkIII is a body to consider, especially if you can find one manufactured after all of the fixes. It will run you about the same as a 1Ds II. I like my mkIII better than my 7D or the IIN's that I've owned.

I think the IIN is more bang for your buck over the 7D, unless you really need video or some of the other features (includind less weight). The 7D is nice, but I don't find its AF performance at the same level as the IIN.

Thank you for the replies. I think I am leaning towards the IIN over the 7D or 5D. I was looking at a 1D IIN group on Flickr and was amazed at the PQ of the images. Is this an accurate method of comparing cameras, or can the images on Flickr be so photoshoped that it isn't really a fair comparison. Thanks!
Example
http://www.flickr.com/photos/riccardo100/4589773560/sizes/o/in/pool-605052@N21/

ziggy53

Flickr and PBase and SmugMug (best for last) all have samples from the 1D MKII and 1S MKIIN (both cameras share the same imager and image processor.) There is no way to know for sure how much post-processing was done to a JPG image from a non-professional review site or personal gallery.

It would be best to go to the professional review sites to read the original reviews and to see original image samples.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmkii/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmkii/page24.asp
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon-1d-mkii.shtml
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-Mark-II-Digital-Camera-Review.aspx
http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/eos-1d-mark-ii-slr/canon-eos-1d-mark-ii-slr-review.html


Galleries:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-1d-mk-ii-review-samples/slideshow
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sample-Pictures.aspx?Equipment=7
http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/eos-1d-mark-ii-slr/canon-eos-1d-mark-ii-slr-review-9.html

Realize that any dSLR does its best shooting in RAW and that some sharpening is "required" for best results with any camera that uses an anti-alias filter (most do). Take any unprocessed images with a little grain of salt.

In some sports applications you may "want" to shoot JPG just to speed up the process of shooting and to make use of card storage space. In that case in-camera sharpening may be indicated as well.