Reading mode: Light Dark

1Ds mkII hand holdable for sharp pictures??

Go to last post
D

davve

Leading Member
Messages
620
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you could write your experience with the camera.
 
davve said:
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It
also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be
more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because
I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you
could write your experience with the camera.
Click to expand...
 
I'm also very interested in these first experiences of 1DSII owners. What I want to understand is which one will be my next pro-camera for landscape (wether Nikon or Canon.. being that I already own both systems with D10 and D70).

But I do not agree that the 1DSII pictures that I have seen till now on the web (except for the two "official" on the Canon site) are sharper than those of 1DS, I would say they have softer detail and wide lenses show many chromatic aberrations. I don't worry to use a tripod if this could be the solution (in landscape photos you must anyway), but I'm trying to find an alternative to 4"x5" transparencies+scanner... I think that I have to wait still a long time
--
Pier Luigi
http://www.pbase.com \plspezza
 
davve said:
davve wrote:
I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera.
Click to expand...
The EOS-1 camera body design has been around since 1989, and (since then) has been used by more photojournalists (which is my background), than any other camera produced. Handholdability is a MUST in photojournalism. Pick up any EOS-1 (film or digital) body and feel how it fits into your hand, either in portrait or landscape positions. Hand holdability is key element in the design of the EOS camera body. Yes, it is heavier than a 10/20-D, or Digital Rebel, but that weight also works for you, as the camera is more balanced when you use heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm, 35-350mm and other bigger heavier lenses. The older film EOS cameras were also heavy, as they had the 8-battery PB-E1/2 motor drive units attached.
davve said:
I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod.
Click to expand...
"needs to be used with a tripod" That article is WRONG! I have been a professional photographer for 20-years and have owned many cameras, including medium format Rolleis, Hasselblads, and a Pentax 6x7, as well as my current EOS-1Ds, and can say with certainty, that there is absolutely no comparison with a MF body. Different cameras for different uses.
davve said:
It also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results.
Click to expand...
Well, the article finally proves that it's not a total write-off. Yes, the higher resolution EOS-1Ds series cameras can exploit the deficiencies of, and outresolve poor lenses, and thus you DO need top notch glass with these cameras. Or a really good sharpening algorithm...

Hope this clarifies things a bit...

DAJr.
 
I own the old 1Ds and a D60...I find that to avoid blur with the 1Ds, you generally have to use a shutter speed one stop fast than the D60. This is especially evident when useing flash mixed with ambient...I find I get a secondary image if people are moving with the Ds even at a 60th, whereas with the D60 I get a little background smear, but no secondary image on the actual people. I would imagine this would be the case with the Mark2 also.
DAJr said:
DAJr said:
davve wrote:
I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera.
Click to expand...
The EOS-1 camera body design has been around since 1989, and (since
then) has been used by more photojournalists (which is my
background), than any other camera produced. Handholdability is a
MUST in photojournalism. Pick up any EOS-1 (film or digital) body
and feel how it fits into your hand, either in portrait or
landscape positions. Hand holdability is key element in the design
of the EOS camera body. Yes, it is heavier than a 10/20-D, or
Digital Rebel, but that weight also works for you, as the camera is
more balanced when you use heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm,
35-350mm and other bigger heavier lenses. The older film EOS
cameras were also heavy, as they had the 8-battery PB-E1/2 motor
drive units attached.
DAJr said:
I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod.
Click to expand...
"needs to be used with a tripod" That article is WRONG! I have
been a professional photographer for 20-years and have owned many
cameras, including medium format Rolleis, Hasselblads, and a Pentax
6x7, as well as my current EOS-1Ds, and can say with certainty,
that there is absolutely no comparison with a MF body. Different
cameras for different uses.
DAJr said:
It also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results.
Click to expand...
Well, the article finally proves that it's not a total write-off.
Yes, the higher resolution EOS-1Ds series cameras can exploit the
deficiencies of, and outresolve poor lenses, and thus you DO need
top notch glass with these cameras. Or a really good sharpening
algorithm...

Hope this clarifies things a bit...

DAJr.
Click to expand...
--
Andy C
 
I don't have experience with the MK2 yet, but with the 1Ds MK1, I would say - if you look at images at 100% as folks around here tend to do, then camera shake will show up more than on a lower resolution camera.

On the Mk2 that effect should be more, but compensated by the potential for better high iso.

As for needing to use a tripod - nonsense! OK, sharpness is not the holy grail for me, but decent technique will still carry the day.

Some of the examples at http://www.mekongpicture.com/India200410X/ are acceptably sharp to me even at quite low shutter speeds. I don't see that the MK2 should be much worse.

As for needing good lenses - yes there I concur.

Cheers
davve said:
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It
also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be
more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because
I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you
could write your experience with the camera.
Click to expand...
--
Ian S
'To see a World in a grain of sand
And Heaven in a wild flower
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour'
http://www.mekongpicture.com/gallery/Varanasi/
http://www.rainpalm.com
http://www.mekongpicturehouse.com
 
Andrew Chiciak said:
Andrew Chiciak wrote:
I own the old 1Ds and a D60...I find that to avoid blur with the
1Ds, you generally have to use a shutter speed one stop fast than
the D60.
Click to expand...
It all comes down to technique...

I, as (I'm sure) many others, have shot handheld with a 1D/1Ds at ridiculously long shutter speeds with success. That's not to say that I haven't had poor results, due to my own movement. You can't blame the camera for operator error. For some, the added weight of a 1-series camera may induce a bit more camera shake than with a lighter camera, such as the D60. For me, camera weight was never a "make or break" issue. I had good results when I was steady, poor results when I moved, regardless of camera used.

One just has to try and refine their technique.

DAJr.
 
"I find I get a secondary image if people are moving with the Ds even at a 60th, whereas with the D60" You can't blame a camera for people moving!
Kevin.
Andrew Chiciak said:
DAJr said:
Andrew Chiciak said:
davve wrote:
I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera.
Click to expand...
The EOS-1 camera body design has been around since 1989, and (since
then) has been used by more photojournalists (which is my
background), than any other camera produced. Handholdability is a
MUST in photojournalism. Pick up any EOS-1 (film or digital) body
and feel how it fits into your hand, either in portrait or
landscape positions. Hand holdability is key element in the design
of the EOS camera body. Yes, it is heavier than a 10/20-D, or
Digital Rebel, but that weight also works for you, as the camera is
more balanced when you use heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm,
35-350mm and other bigger heavier lenses. The older film EOS
cameras were also heavy, as they had the 8-battery PB-E1/2 motor
drive units attached.
Andrew Chiciak said:
I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod.
Click to expand...
"needs to be used with a tripod" That article is WRONG! I have
been a professional photographer for 20-years and have owned many
cameras, including medium format Rolleis, Hasselblads, and a Pentax
6x7, as well as my current EOS-1Ds, and can say with certainty,
that there is absolutely no comparison with a MF body. Different
cameras for different uses.
Andrew Chiciak said:
It also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results.
Click to expand...
Well, the article finally proves that it's not a total write-off.
Yes, the higher resolution EOS-1Ds series cameras can exploit the
deficiencies of, and outresolve poor lenses, and thus you DO need
top notch glass with these cameras. Or a really good sharpening
algorithm...

Hope this clarifies things a bit...

DAJr.
Click to expand...
--
Andy C
Click to expand...
 
Hi

I've been using a 1Ds for about a year or so and have only ever used a tripod for studio and low light work. It's great for hand held stuff, and I look forward to trying it with the MkII (when I can find the excuse/business justification to buy one ;-)

I've always thought there was a lot of nonsense (IMHO) talked about the 'need' for tripods, maybe I've just been blessed with steady hands, but I rarely ever use one for my landscape work either.

--
bye for now

Keith Cooper
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk
 
Hi there,

Some general elements of answer.

I don't own a 1DsMKII and will not buy one, although I could probably afford one, bulk being one of the reasons (I would be using this camera for landscape where it would have no clear advantage over the Kodak SLR/n that I own).

However, this being said, I have done street photography in Tokyo for some time with a Hassy H1 fitted with a 80 f2.8. I have had very good results and the images are mostly sharp. The H1 is probably just about as heavy of a 1DsMKII, if not more.

My view is that for point and shoot type of photography, which PJ essentially is, weight can be a plus when using the camera handheld for a short amount of time, since inertia tends to damp out the high frequency shake of a non tired hand/arm.

If you try to keep framing for more than a few seconds, then the overall weight starts to impact your arm's muscles, and slower, higher amplitude vibration start to show up. Those will be worse with a heavy camera like the 1DsMK2 or the Hassy H1 and will badly effect sharpness. Photographers who spend time working out in the gymn probably have an edge here... :-)

Either way, VR or IS lenses do help a lot here also, and you end up running into problems related more to the movement of the objects in the scene, than to camera shake itself. This is where high ISO performance/resolution ratio becomes important, and where the 1DsMKII seems to offer some significantly unique value over competing systems (the only area IMHO).

However, the level of sharpeness that I expect and consider acceptable from such street photography (very close to PJ work actually) is far lower than that I expect from my landscape shots...

Anyone willing to achieve critical sharpness for large enlargements of finely structurd scenes should use a tripod and MLU, that goes without saying. This is true for LF, MF and high definition 35 DSLR too.

One could actually argue that a hand held 1DsMKII will not offer images that contain significantly more resolution than a 20D on tripod, and probably less... using a 1DsMKII without tripods for types of photography that allow the use of it would be plain stupid IMHO (landscape, architecture, commercial work, formal portraits...).

Best regards,
Bernard
davve said:
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It
also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be
more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because
I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you
could write your experience with the camera.
Click to expand...
 
Hello Andrew,

The article said exactly the same thing. You need to use a shutter speed one stop faster than the D60's. Thanks for the advice.
Andrew Chiciak said:
DAJr said:
Andrew Chiciak said:
davve wrote:
I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera.
Click to expand...
The EOS-1 camera body design has been around since 1989, and (since
then) has been used by more photojournalists (which is my
background), than any other camera produced. Handholdability is a
MUST in photojournalism. Pick up any EOS-1 (film or digital) body
and feel how it fits into your hand, either in portrait or
landscape positions. Hand holdability is key element in the design
of the EOS camera body. Yes, it is heavier than a 10/20-D, or
Digital Rebel, but that weight also works for you, as the camera is
more balanced when you use heavy lenses such as the 70-200mm,
35-350mm and other bigger heavier lenses. The older film EOS
cameras were also heavy, as they had the 8-battery PB-E1/2 motor
drive units attached.
Andrew Chiciak said:
I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod.
Click to expand...
"needs to be used with a tripod" That article is WRONG! I have
been a professional photographer for 20-years and have owned many
cameras, including medium format Rolleis, Hasselblads, and a Pentax
6x7, as well as my current EOS-1Ds, and can say with certainty,
that there is absolutely no comparison with a MF body. Different
cameras for different uses.
Andrew Chiciak said:
It also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results.
Click to expand...
Well, the article finally proves that it's not a total write-off.
Yes, the higher resolution EOS-1Ds series cameras can exploit the
deficiencies of, and outresolve poor lenses, and thus you DO need
top notch glass with these cameras. Or a really good sharpening
algorithm...

Hope this clarifies things a bit...

DAJr.
Click to expand...
--
Andy C
Click to expand...
 
Hello Bernard,

Thanks for the advice. How do you do street photography with a Hassy H1? It is not a small camera. Do you have any special technique to hold the heavy camera steady? I would like to learn some new ways to hold my dslr steady. Thanks again.
Bernard Languillier said:
Some general elements of answer.

I don't own a 1DsMKII and will not buy one, although I could
probably afford one, bulk being one of the reasons (I would be
using this camera for landscape where it would have no clear
advantage over the Kodak SLR/n that I own).

However, this being said, I have done street photography in Tokyo
for some time with a Hassy H1 fitted with a 80 f2.8. I have had
very good results and the images are mostly sharp. The H1 is
probably just about as heavy of a 1DsMKII, if not more.

My view is that for point and shoot type of photography, which PJ
essentially is, weight can be a plus when using the camera handheld
for a short amount of time, since inertia tends to damp out the
high frequency shake of a non tired hand/arm.

If you try to keep framing for more than a few seconds, then the
overall weight starts to impact your arm's muscles, and slower,
higher amplitude vibration start to show up. Those will be worse
with a heavy camera like the 1DsMK2 or the Hassy H1 and will badly
effect sharpness. Photographers who spend time working out in the
gymn probably have an edge here... :-)

Either way, VR or IS lenses do help a lot here also, and you end up
running into problems related more to the movement of the objects
in the scene, than to camera shake itself. This is where high ISO
performance/resolution ratio becomes important, and where the
1DsMKII seems to offer some significantly unique value over
competing systems (the only area IMHO).

However, the level of sharpeness that I expect and consider
acceptable from such street photography (very close to PJ work
actually) is far lower than that I expect from my landscape shots...

Anyone willing to achieve critical sharpness for large enlargements
of finely structurd scenes should use a tripod and MLU, that goes
without saying. This is true for LF, MF and high definition 35 DSLR
too.

One could actually argue that a hand held 1DsMKII will not offer
images that contain significantly more resolution than a 20D on
tripod, and probably less... using a 1DsMKII without tripods for
types of photography that allow the use of it would be plain stupid
IMHO (landscape, architecture, commercial work, formal
portraits...).

Best regards,
Bernard
davve said:
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It
also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be
more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because
I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you
could write your experience with the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
will show you yours.

The camera is just as hand holdable as any other 1D camera at a given shutter speed and print size. The problem starts to show up when you use the full resolution for larger prints which will magnify any camera movement that was there.
davve said:
Hi all

I don't own a 1DS mk2 but am curious about the handholdability of
the camera. I read an article stating that the 1ds mk2 is like a
medium format camera and it needs to be used with a tripod. It
also says that the 1DS mk 2 needs good lenses to achieve good
results. He stresses that blur pictures caused by camera could be
more visible with IDS mk2. I do not know how true this is because
I have seen many sharp IDS mk 2 pictures in this forum. Maybe you
could write your experience with the camera.
Click to expand...
--
Paul Stout
http://www.pbase.com/paul42/renaissance_fairs
over one million hits!
 
Hi Bernard,

Do you recommend mirror lock up for all landscape shots regardless of the shutter speed? I have a 1DMk2 and I'm wondering if the mirror slap is more pronounced than on my 10D. It certainly feels like there is more vibration.

Thanks,
Roberta
http://www.pbase.com/roberta
Canon 1D Mark II, Canon 10D, Canon A80, Sony 717, Olympus C-3000, Nikon FM
 
While I received my 1Ds Mk II on Nov 16 and have yet to take a picture with it, I'd say it is definitely hand-holdable. With the 24-70 f/2.8 lens, I believe it weighs just over 5 pounds. For more than 25 years, I've been hand-holding my RB67 at weddings, etc...and as normally configured, it weighs over 9 pounds...not including the Metz 60CT-1 flash, battery, and Custom Bracket. Of course, it's always on a tripod for landscape work, portraits, or wedding formals...and the Canon will be also.
 
I own a 1Ds(amongst others) there is absolutely no point in mounting a decent heavy camera on a tin pot tripod because you can land up worse than handholding and thats for sure.

It was said above that camera shake only really starts to show as you go bigger with prints etc, well that is true but it is still their even at 10x8.
i mean! why do you think that people buy image stabilised lenses(not for fun)

I find carrying a tripod against the kind of walk about photography that I like doing, they are a pain in the backside and even with my decent carbon fibre pod adds more weight that you could dearly do without BUT results with MU and remote release out of the wind are so far ahead of the same hand held shot(provided it's a decent pod and the tail doesn't wag the dog so to speak)

People wonder why thier expensive 1Ds/or mk 2 don't show the fine detail in tress etc, mine does when on a tripod but when just carried it produces good results but not stunning.

I've experimented over the years with lots of things and one of the best compromises I've come up with that is portable enough to not hinder is to fit something like the Leica table top pod(with the top ball ext on) angle the legs so that they fit against your chest and on your shoulders , breathe in and pull the whole lot in tight as you shoot. I reckon that gives you a stop at least and you can still move around at will( not so good for vertical shots but good for landscape.

Just my thoughts

--
Dave C
 
The resolution has nothing to do with the hand-holdability of a camera, it is purely a function of the size of the sensor.

The smaller the sensor, the greater the magnification required to produce the final print, and hence any shake is magnified more. A 1Ds II is hand-holdable to exactly the same degree as any other full frame 35mm camera. It will be more hand-holdable than a 20D, say, but less hand-holdable than a medium format camera.

The reason people get confused about this is because they look for sharpness when examining an image at 100% on the screen. This is a meaningless way to examine images. The only way that sharpness should be compared is on prints of a fixed reference size. This is the way that the common notions of DoF and the 1/f rule for shutter speed are derived, in terms of acceptability when viewing a 10x8 print at a certain distance.

So, if you compare an 11MP 1Ds against a 16.7MP 1Ds II, and look at 100%, camera shake will be more noticeable on the II because the pixels are smaller. However when you print at 10x8, say, the shake will look identical, because the II's pixels will have been magnified less to produce that print, precisely cancelling out the effect that was seen at 100%.

I've been extremely impressed with the fine detail I've obtained hand-held from my 1Ds II.

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top