Reading mode: Light Dark

Problem w/ 1DmkII

Go to last post
G

gbodley

Member
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
US
With the speed and accuracy of the AF the darn thing takes too many GOOD SHOTS. I have quadrupled my shot count during a game and the keeper number is excellent. It's made the job of culling photos extremely difficult :-)
 
reynoel talattad said:
reynoel talattad wrote:
This is not new.

Rey
Click to expand...
Around this site someone actually liking the camera seems new.

Of the post I've read on this site about the 1DmkII - 90% are "photos not sharp" or "OOF comments"

My point is I'm PLEASED with the results from the 1DmkII. Sharp enough and OOF problems are due to my error not the camera.
 
I agree that people more often complain about 1DMkII than praize it. I was initially unhappy with mine but soon realized that I needed to learn. After some 15 thousand pictures taken I agree that once you master the camera the only problem is you have too many keepers. I have just returned from a trip to Tuscany and I am facing a tiresome process of going through all the images and selecting just the very best ones - it's tough but nobody's gonna do it for me.
Jarek
gbodley said:
gbodley said:
reynoel talattad wrote:
This is not new.

Rey
Click to expand...
Around this site someone actually liking the camera seems new.

Of the post I've read on this site about the 1DmkII - 90% are
"photos not sharp" or "OOF comments"

My point is I'm PLEASED with the results from the 1DmkII. Sharp
enough and OOF problems are due to my error not the camera.
Click to expand...
 
I've got 7 L lenses, and a 120-300 f 2.8 Sizma. I have tested all lenses using the focus grid inclined chart linked on this, and various other sites. I discovered that some of my lenses had FF issues, some had BF issues, and that my 300 F4 IS, my 85 f 1.2, and my 70-200 2.8 were smack on accurate. I decided to forego the 1DM2 AF calibration, because I wasn't sure which lenses might get screwed up by a change, and my current crop was more than acceptable in total.

Ward
 
I've been shooting with my 20D since about October last year and am happy with the results. I've been thinking about getting a 1DMK2...I'm familiar with the basic differences between the two - as listed MANY times throughout this forum, but exactly what type of things are you referring to when you say "once you master the camera"? I'm not talking about learning the differences in the menu, etc., but this and other posts I've read lead me to believe there's more than just learning the mechanical differences between the two. So please define what you mean by mastering the camera.

Thanks!
jarek leo said:
gbodley said:
jarek leo said:
reynoel talattad wrote:
This is not new.

Rey
Click to expand...
Around this site someone actually liking the camera seems new.

Of the post I've read on this site about the 1DmkII - 90% are
"photos not sharp" or "OOF comments"

My point is I'm PLEASED with the results from the 1DmkII. Sharp
enough and OOF problems are due to my error not the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
While I know lenses and cams do sometimes need to be calibrated, it's not nearly as common as those who need to learn to use their equipment. Many come from P&S cams and aren't used to the change in controls and DOF and immediately are dissatisfied.

Teski
Ken Phillips said:
90% of people with 90% OOF shots don't know how to use the camera.
The remainder need their AF recalibrated.
Ken

--



http://www.ahomls.com/gallery.htm
Voted Best of the City 2004 by Cincinnati Magazine
I don't believe in fate, but I do believe in f/8!
Click to expand...
 
SGW said:
SGW wrote:
I've been shooting with my 20D since about October last year and am
happy with the results. I've been thinking about getting a
1DMK2
Click to expand...
If you are satisfied - why change?
SGW said:
exactly what type
of things are you referring to when you say "once you master the
camera"? I'm not talking about learning the differences in the
menu, etc., but this and other posts I've read lead me to believe
there's more than just learning the mechanical differences between
the two. So please define what you mean by mastering the camera.
Click to expand...
What differences other than mechanical differences can there be? In my case (only had the camera for 1 week and 3,000 shots) the main differences/improvements I've seen are the speed and accuracy of the AF and spot metering. For my sports shooting this makes a tremendous difference.
 
I didn't say I was changing... I'm thinking of adding on. And I don't know what other differences there would be besides mechanical. That's why I was asking jarke lo what he meant by mastering the camera if it was something beyond the mechanical differences...
gbodley said:
gbodley said:
SGW wrote:
I've been shooting with my 20D since about October last year and am
happy with the results. I've been thinking about getting a
1DMK2
Click to expand...
If you are satisfied - why change?
gbodley said:
exactly what type
of things are you referring to when you say "once you master the
camera"? I'm not talking about learning the differences in the
menu, etc., but this and other posts I've read lead me to believe
there's more than just learning the mechanical differences between
the two. So please define what you mean by mastering the camera.
Click to expand...
What differences other than mechanical differences can there be?
In my case (only had the camera for 1 week and 3,000 shots) the
main differences/improvements I've seen are the speed and accuracy
of the AF and spot metering. For my sports shooting this makes a
tremendous difference.
Click to expand...
 
Did you see my thread the other day?
--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!
 
Gbodley is right. For sports it makes a tremendous difference. My 20D feels like a snail now.
 
came out. Let me tell you, I went running back to the 1DMK11. No, the 20D isn't bad...as a matter of fact it is a great camera for the price...but now with rebate on the MK11 there is no better buy out there IMHO. There is a difference in the look of the pictures..not sure if it is dynamic range or what...I am no pro, but I sure prefer the MK11 JPEG over the 20D JPEG...again IMHO. The physical differences of the cameras is worth the ticket all by itself.

Jimmy Drew
 
...otherwise, just ask the thousands of folks that are out there, shooting, or those that are lurking around here and still do not manifest them... Even though I can not identify them, I have been tracking their presence, here... :-)
 
...the tonal vibrancy and contrast, the colors, the purity of the 1D MKII JPGs stands-out clearly , visibly over the 20D. And when sharpening comes to the table, the 1D MKII exhibits an unparalleled degree of image integrity (it can take much more abuse, before halos, artifacts and other sorts of impurities begin to appear on the screen, especially when compared to 20D output).

Happy shooting!
 
I totally agree. MKII is a fine camera in every respect. I have never understood all the complaining about it. I loved it from day one and still do.
--
Canon EOS 1D MarkII, Canon 17-40, Canon 70 200F2.8
 
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