1D Mk II owners please help me decide

jeff lapoint

Some advice needed!

I'm a 20D user that shoots mostly wildlife (90% of the time) and have saved up enough to grab a used 1D MK II. Thinking of the pro body for the speed (both in FPS and AF) and the durability/weather sealing.

How much faster is the AF vs the 20D? If you made this jump and shoot action often, did your number of "keepers" rise significantly?

I also realize that I am no professional by any means and that the 20D is still alot of camera (and that 1.6x gives me more reach). Sometimes though I do feel it is holding me back for flight shots. Especially with the raptors...

And yes, I am fully aware of some of the images produced of raptors with the 20D/10D/XT/300d by users of this forum and others. The fact that Gene (hawkman) is using a 10D makes me hesitate and consider option 2...

Option 2: Invest in glass

Investing in glass seems to be the sounder investment, but it will not help me shoot wildlife with the money I have. I currently shoot with the 400 5.6 L, so unless I can find a used 500 4.5 L for about $3000 I'll only be broadening the types of things I'd be shooting (not a bad thing). My current kit includes:18-55 cat toy, 20 2.8, thrifty fifty, 200 2.8, and my 400 + TC. I'd like a nice wide angle for landscapes, an extreme macro, or a sweet IS zoom for when the light gets sparce down the road, but the image of the mark II lingers in my head!

Thoughts? Advice? Thanks so much for the help guys!

-j

mercphoto

jeff lapoint wrote:

I'm a 20D user that shoots mostly wildlife (90% of the time) and have saved up enough to grab a used 1D MK II. Thinking of the pro body for the speed (both in FPS and AF) and the durability/weather sealing.

What is your AF problem in more specific terms? For example, is it simply not tracking the moving birds well? Or is the focus drifting to the sky or to a background and off the bird? Some of these issues will be solved by a 1-series. Some are technique errors that you will have with any camera. The weather sealing is hard to argue against, unless you want a reason to stay indoors in inclement weather.

jeff lapoint

mercphoto wrote:

What is your AF problem in more specific terms? For example, is it simply not tracking the moving birds well? Or is the focus drifting to the sky or to a background and off the bird? Some of these issues will be solved by a 1-series. Some are technique errors that you will have with any camera. The weather sealing is hard to argue against, unless you want a reason to stay indoors in inclement weather.

Thanks for reply Bill. AF works fine for the most part--just a tad slower than I would like. I mostly use AI with the center point engaged although lately I have been activating all the focus points to see if it makes any difference. This is without the TC mind you as I expect things to slowdown a bit with it on. This works fine if I have alot of time and see the bird approaching, but there are times when you get surprised and the AF takes just a fraction of a second too long to aquire the target.

I should say that I'd also like to start doing more sports (surfing, skating, football, rodeo--) and I wonder if this would be a problem here as well.

As for technique issues, its more than possible that user error is a big part and I'd love to improve my technique regardless of the body I choose. Any ideas here?
It kinda rainy here today and I for sure feel a bit homebound!

-j

mercphoto

jeff lapoint wrote:

Thanks for reply Bill. AF works fine for the most part--just a tad slower than I would like. I mostly use AI with the center point engaged although lately I have been activating all the focus points to see if it makes any difference. This is without the TC mind you as I expect things to slowdown a bit with it on. This works fine if I have alot of time and see the bird approaching, but there are times when you get surprised and the AF takes just a fraction of a second too long to aquire the target.

I should say that I'd also like to start doing more sports (surfing, skating, football, rodeo--) and I wonder if this would be a problem here as well.

As for technique issues, its more than possible that user error is a big part and I'd love to improve my technique regardless of the body I choose. Any ideas here?
It kinda rainy here today and I for sure feel a bit homebound!

-j

Bear in mind that 5.6 glass, like your 400mm, will focus slower than faster glass, regardless of the camera body. More light means stronger contrast, and that makes life easier on the AF controller. Also note the 400/5.6 won't auto-focus on a 20D but will on a 1-series. I know the 1-series is faster at AF, but I have no direct experience to know how much so. I also know it AF's much differently in burst-mode than a 20D does.

As per user error, make sure you don't let the bird drift off the focus point as it travels. I had this issue when doing football. I often wondered how much help a 1-series would be, with its much more numerous and more tightly bunched focus sensors would be.

T(h)orsten

400mm F5.6 + TC
Jeff,

unfortunately I cant help with your question, but I read you are using "400mm + TC". I was considering the option 400mm + TC, but wasn't sure if it will work fine: Autofocus issues, slower lens etc. Are you actually using the TC with the 400mm. Which TC are you using. What is your experience?


Bill,

Also note the 400/5.6 won't auto-focus on a 20D but will on a 1-series

Do you mean with a TC or in general?


Thanks!

jeff lapoint

T(h)orsten wrote:

Jeff,

unfortunately I cant help with your question, but I read you are using "400mm + TC". I was considering the option 400mm + TC, but wasn't sure if it will work fine: Autofocus issues, slower lens etc. Are you actually using the TC with the 400mm. Which TC are you using. What is your experience?


Bill,

Do you mean with a TC or in general?


Thanks!

I just started using the tamron 1.4x (cheap version~$100) with my 400 5.6 yesterday. It will still AF because the TC does not report aperature to the camera. If I were using the canon TC it would not AF on the 20D...it would only work on 1 series bodies.

So far I'm impressed with the combo, but I have yet to really put it through its paces as the weather has been poor here for the last few days. Considering it gets me to 896mm (400x1.4x1.6 crop factor) for about $100 is worth trying though.

hope this helps!

back to the 1D issue, another plus is I could use the canon 1.4x TC!

Bill, I have had the same user error of tracking a bird in flight before, especially at first, but it has become less of a problem. The main issue now is when I need to aquire something quickly...You said you wondered how the 1D II would perform with its tighter sensors. What did you discover once you bought the camera?

mercphoto

jeff lapoint wrote:

You said you wondered how the 1D II would perform with its tighter sensors. What did you discover once you bought the camera?

Since I don't shoot football any longer (I found it boring to do) I ran out of excuses/reasons/rationales to purchase a 1-series. So I haven't done so.

pathfinder

Jeff, I am fortunate in that I own a 20D and a 1DMkll among other cameras. I rarely reflect on the differences, but they are definitely there. The 1DMkll will focus faster and in dimmer light than the 20D. The viewfinder is larger and brighter. The 20D weighs a lot less at the end of the day.

An f5.6 lens is slow, no matter how you cook it. And trying to AF at f8, won't fly on a 20D. Yes the Tamron TC won't the body know it is an f8, but it still IS an f8 and it will be dim to look through and to focus through. A 1DMkll will AF with the center AF point at f8. But it still will be dim, and I find f2.8 and f4 lenses dim when shooting prior to sunrise sometimes
Indeed, AF fails on my 1DMkll when it gets really dim.

For birds, I think the answer really is longer, faster glass - lots longer, lots faster, but unfortunately that is a LOT more moula. Your 200 f2.8 is a great choice and will couple nicely with a 2x TC on a 20D for instance. The 135 L is a great lens on a 20D also - much easer to handle than a 500mm which WILL require a tripod os some type.

As an alternative, how about getting closer - using a blind. That is cheap by comparison. I got one for free from Cabelas by using my Cabelas points. How about using inconspcuous feeders to draw them in.

As for BIFs, they depend to some extent on predicting the birds arrivals and departures, but longer, faster glass helps. The problem then is that the longer, faster glass is not only expensive, it is big, heavy, a security problem ( concerns about theft) and used for a relatively few of your shots unless you limit your shooting to birds or widlife only. I sorted through this conundrum last year, but there is no way to miss the fact that a lot of money is involved. I shoot a lot, lot more with my 24-70 than I do with my 300,400, and 500 lenses combined, unless I am shooting birds. It only took me forty years of working to be able to enjoy the best fruits of Canon's labors.

A used 1DMkll body will be lots cheaper than more new fast, long glass, but faster, longer glass is always desireable. If you look at Art Morris website www.birdasart.com you will find he uses 500mm and 600mm lenses, with 2xTCs and stacked 1.4 and 2x TCs. So for the ultimate birdshooters, you can never have enough length. But as the focal length gets longer, the technical skills required get more difficult also. Think how much more careful you have to focus at 400mm than you do at 50mm, and how much harder it is to find your subject through a 400mm lens than a 85mm lens.

I can't answer your question of body versus glass. But there are a number of foks here who use 10Ds, 300Ds, and get great images. They tend to have good glass and a great eye and the technical skills to use them. Let us know what you finally do decide.

jeff lapoint

Path,

Thanks so very much for the detailed reply. I've come to love my 400 5.6. As long as I am careful to shoot during bright sunny days it works wonderfully and with the good ISO performance of the 20D, I am am usually getting shutter speeds of 2000 or more at f5.6.

I plan on continuing to shoot mostly wildlife and of that mostly birds, but I think it will be sometime before I can justify/afford the 500f4. At least at the time he wrote The Art of Bird Photography, the 400 5.6 was Morris' favorite flight lens!

I quess the real question is what will help my bird photography the most (aside from your wonderful suggestion such as blinds which I will certainly look into), the AF and rugged construction of the 1dII or a used clean copy of a 500 4.5?

I'm not just gear crazy here (ok, maybe alittle) and I am trying to be honest with myself when I consider if I have really maxed out the technical capabilities of the 20D (doubtful). I do feel that even a slight increase in AF speed, if it can help with my ratio of keepers would be worth the upgrade. The question is: is the 1dII's AF that much faster?

Thanks again everybody for all the advice! I'd love to hear any other opinions you may have!!

-j

mercphoto

jeff lapoint wrote:

I quess the real question is what will help my bird photography the most (aside from your wonderful suggestion such as blinds which I will certainly look into), the AF and rugged construction of the 1dII or a used clean copy of a 500 4.5?

My vote is glass.

luckyrwe

Get the glass now, the body will always go down in price. If you find yourself with a 400/5.6 and 1.4x (like I have) then the 1DII is the way to go to get the AF working in your favor. Not only is the AF faster on the 1DII, the entire camera snaps to attention a lot faster from what I have seen. The camera waits for me, whereas a friend is waiting for his 20D to catch up to him.

jeff lapoint

luckyrwe wrote:

The camera waits for me, whereas a friend is waiting for his 20D to catch up to him.

This is exactly how I feel sometimes with the 20D. Not often, but enought o make me start saving for the 1DII.

I have and love my 400 5.6, so the only lens I would be looking at now would be the 500 4.5 discontinued rarity.

-j

pathfinder

jeff lapoint wrote:

Path,

Thanks so very much for the detailed reply. I've come to love my 400 5.6. As long as I am careful to shoot during bright sunny days it works wonderfully and with the good ISO performance of the 20D, I am am usually getting shutter speeds of 2000 or more at f5.6.

I plan on continuing to shoot mostly wildlife and of that mostly birds, but I think it will be sometime before I can justify/afford the 500f4. At least at the time he wrote The Art of Bird Photography, the 400 5.6 was Morris' favorite flight lens!

I quess the real question is what will help my bird photography the most (aside from your wonderful suggestion such as blinds which I will certainly look into), the AF and rugged construction of the 1dII or a used clean copy of a 500 4.5?

I'm not just gear crazy here (ok, maybe alittle) and I am trying to be honest with myself when I consider if I have really maxed out the technical capabilities of the 20D (doubtful). I do feel that even a slight increase in AF speed, if it can help with my ratio of keepers would be worth the upgrade. The question is: is the 1dII's AF that much faster?

Thanks again everybody for all the advice! I'd love to hear any other opinions you may have!!

-j

For BIFs, 400mm is just about right, as it can be hard to find and track BIFs with longer lenses. The 300 +2XTC works pretty nice also - smaller, lighter than a 600 prime - I use this combo a lot

handheld 300+2xTC f6.3 1/2000 ISO 250


handheld 100-400mm f8.0 1/800th ISO 400 20D


But the 20D will not AF or frame rate like the 1DMkll

This image was captured in high speed frame rate and I doubt the 20D would have done as well on a supersonic target - whether this frame rate is needed for birds

handheld f14 1/500 ISO 250 1DMkll 100-400mm lens This is a crop of the full image

jeff lapoint

pathfinder wrote:

Damn thats cool...

Bodley

jeff lapoint wrote:

Some advice needed!

I'm a 20D user that shoots mostly wildlife (90% of the time) and have saved up enough to grab a used 1D MK II. Thinking of the pro body for the speed (both in FPS and AF) and the durability/weather sealing.

How much faster is the AF vs the 20D? If you made this jump and shoot action often, did your number of "keepers" rise significantly?

I progressed from 10D to 20D to 1DmkII for sports. For me the 1DmkII just fits - Faster more accurate AF which resulted in more keepers. No regrets with the 1DmkII.

As for camera vs glass - I went (and am still going) through the same thing. Some never get over it (read camera"s" and mucho glass i.e. Andy, windoz ....). But the camera can only do what the glass will let it, and working around camera limitations is easier than glass limitations IMO.

I'm still learning, so please factor this in with comments.

Greg

jeff lapoint

Bodley wrote:

I progressed from 10D to 20D to 1DmkII for sports. For me the 1DmkII just fits - Faster more accurate AF which resulted in more keepers. No regrets with the 1DmkII.

As for camera vs glass - I went (and am still going) through the same thing. Some never get over it (read camera"s" and mucho glass i.e. Andy, windoz ....). But the camera can only do what the glass will let it, and working around camera limitations is easier than glass limitations IMO.

I'm still learning, so please factor this in with comments.

Greg

Thanks for the advice Greg. Faster more accurate AF is exactly what I'm looking for!

OlgaJ

I had a 20D and would have never spent the $4,500 for the heavy, huge, 1DM2. But then I won one last Jan 1st at a giveaway (no photo contest). I was almost prepared to sell it but was first tempted to try it. End result: I've sold my 20D and kept the 1DM2.

The 1D focuses faster and more accurately than my 20D ever did. This may not be necessarily true with all copies, but it was a fact with mine.

For birds and other wildlife, I started out the year with a 100-400L, bought a used 400L and eventually found a used 500mm f/4IS. I've used the big gun very little since I bought it. I certainly should be using it more. But I find it easier to grab the 400L + 1.4TC, especially if I go shooting alone. (I'm a small, older woman, without the strength that a 500mm requires.)

I don't think you could regret getting a 1DM2 at today's prices unless you got a lemon.

This was my one great outing when I first used 1DM2 and 400mm with and without 1.4 TC.

http://yiayia.smugmug.com/gallery/502638

Olga

jeff lapoint

Thanks Olga!

I need to enter one of those give-aways!!

Do you use the canon 1.4x TC with the 1DII?


Thanks again for the advice and I love the gallery!

-j

OlgaJ

jeff lapoint wrote:

Do you use the canon 1.4x TC with the 1DII?

Yes, I use the Canon 1.4TC.

Olga

luckyrwe

I love that picture, may I do this?

pathfinder

luckyrwe wrote:

I love that picture, may I do this?

sure :

helmet155

jeff lapoint wrote:

Some advice needed!


Option 2: Invest in glass



-j

If you're not going to consider switching to Nikon, then glass is your best bet Jeff...that 20D is an awesome camera IMO...

Glasswise: 300/2.8 + 1.4x TC

My favorite nature and wildlife photog swears by this combo (Ron Reznick)...but hey a 500 or a 400/2.8 would be the shizzy too!

pathfinder

helmet155 wrote:

Glasswise: 300/2.8 + 1.4x TC

My favorite nature and wildlife photog swears by this combo (Ron Reznick)...but hey a 500 or a 400/2.8 would be the shizzy too!

I've been singing the praises of the 300f2.8 with a 2XTC or a 1.4XTC many times. I din't know Mr Reznick agreed with me too. WOW !!

jeff lapoint

helmet155 wrote:

If you're not going to consider switching to Nikon, then glass is your best bet Jeff...that 20D is an awesome camera IMO...

Glasswise: 300/2.8 + 1.4x TC

My favorite nature and wildlife photog swears by this combo (Ron Reznick)...but hey a 500 or a 400/2.8 would be the shizzy too!

fo sho the shizzy brett, but like 2x the price of a used 1DII

helmet155

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/305736

jeff lapoint

helmet155 wrote:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/305736

I know, I know!! Its time to man up and list my 20D for sale

I would also like to take this opportunity to say the pimp icon/smiley is sadly underused...

Eric&Susan

Depending on what happens with the 300d and repairs I might be in the market for a 20d

Let me know if/when you decide to part with yet another camera

Eric

jeff lapoint

Eric&Susan wrote:

Depending on what happens with the 300d and repairs I might be in the market for a 20d

Let me know if/when you decide to part with yet another camera

Eric

linkage

cmr164

OlgaJ wrote:

I had a 20D and would have never spent the $4,500 for the heavy, huge, 1DM2. But then I won one last Jan 1st at a giveaway (no photo contest). I was almost prepared to sell it but was first tempted to try it. End result: I've sold my 20D and kept the 1DM2.

The 1D focuses faster and more accurately than my 20D ever did. This may not be necessarily true with all copies, but it was a fact with mine.

The 1DMII is wicked fast focusing in aiservo mode. And the camera is just feature packed compared to the 20D. Lots of small but noticeable things like a brighter viewfinder, way faster media writes, weather proofing, custom functions, better file management, etc.

For birds and other wildlife, I started out the year with a 100-400L, bought a used 400L and eventually found a used 500mm f/4IS. I've used the big gun very little since I bought it. I certainly should be using it more. But I find it easier to grab the 400L + 1.4TC, especially if I go shooting alone. (I'm a small, older woman, without the strength that a 500mm requires.)

I am a big hulking man and I would have trouble using the 500 f/4.0L IS for birds-in-flight even though I do use it handheld all the time.

I don't think you could regret getting a 1DM2 at today's prices unless you got a lemon.

This was my one great outing when I first used 1DM2 and 400mm with and without 1.4 TC.

http://yiayia.smugmug.com/gallery/502638

Olga

very good solid advice.

Earlier in the thread someone was recommending his 200mm f/2.8 with a 2x TC but that is a bad choice compared to the 400mm f/5.6 that he already has. Same f-stop and length but not as good optics.

Given the glass he already has... It is a no brainer to get the 1DMII body. The next step in glass is a huge investment.

400mm f/4.0 DO IS is light and 1 stop faster (only) at $5250 (4.3 lb)

300mm f/2.8L IS is is fast and would give a 600mm f/5.6 with a 2x TC for $4000. (5.6 lb)

500mm f/4.0L IS at $5400 (but 8.5 lb is too much for BIF)

600mm f/4.0L IS $7000 (11.5 lb !!!!!!!)


So over his 200 2.8 and 400 5.6 glass there are only incremental improvements at huge cost. He should do the body.

Andy

jeff lapoint wrote:

Some advice needed!

Option 2: Invest in glass

Thoughts? Advice? Thanks so much for the help guys!

-j

Glass. Good glass

rutt

Long term capital acquisition plan
Keep that 20D. You won't get that much for it and it's like the world's best TC. You get the actual optics of the lens without degradation. I don't know about BIF shots, but great for surfers and skiers and the like.

Look for a 300mm f/2.8. These are hard to find used, but they do exist. I got one from Adorama last summer in not quite mint shape for about $3k with a 3rd party 3 year warranty (don't know what that's worth).

Keep your eyes open for used 1DMkIIs. This is an extremely sturdy great camera and you don't need mint. With both 5D and 1DMkIIN out, I think the prices of these will drop through the $2k floor by xmas. Canon has to have something in the works that will replace both 1DMkII and 1DsMkII (in the spring?) That will drive the price lower still. Try a WTB on FM and here. I have insider knowledge that there are 1DMkII owners with a desire to replace with a 5D.