You are right. What Mark meant was that his list of items were all specs that are better on the 1DMkII than the 1Ds. The primary improvements on the 1Ds seem to be the full frame sensor and pixel count. Some on this forum feel the 1DMkII may have sub-par sharpness also, but I think it remains to be seen. There are a few sharp 1DMkII pictures out there. Give it a week and we will probably all know.
yes apologies for any confusion.
--
and we'll just have to reside ourselves to that
Here's Michael's review of the 400 F5.6 with crops from the 1DS
which have been post processed - he says that he doesn't have a
Duff 100-400L and we all know the 400 F5.6 to be a Stellar lens
wide open so it may give an idea as to the sort of glass needed to
make the most of these big CMOS Cameras..
the 1D Mk1 of course gets pixel level sharper than even the 1DS +
400 F5.6 - even with a crappola plastic mount consumer 80-200
F4.5-5.6 let alone an L but then it's not 8.2 or 11Mp is it.. I
very much doubt that there will EVER be an 8 + Mp camera with 1D
Mk1 sharpness unless Foveon pull their fingers out
just have to reside ourselves to that
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
100% Crops from a 1D Mk1 using an old Sigma 170-500 (not exactly
known for being the best lens on earth) WIDE OPEN
And for a REAL Laugh - Sigma 28-300 Compact 1D RAW 100% crops Wide
open
I guess that I won't get the same performance from a Mk2 ;-)
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
EOS-1D - Sigma SD9
When I received the 1DS (I received it before many of the reviews
were published so was unaware of how harsh it was on poorer glass)
I put these lenses straight to use with it and started shooting
using a similar workflow to before...hence my disappointment.
Cheaper lenses cannot maintain quality across the film plane and at
various apertures, when using such a high resolving sensor.
As you can imagine I switched most of my lenses to better quality L
glass (although I love the 50mm 1.4), and found that the 1DS was
really quite incredibly sharp. I am still in awe of how
3-dimensional some images can look from that camera.
I have owned the 1D MkII for nearly a week now and must say that it
IS natively sharp. The 16-35mm L lens does not do it justice
(that lens never did on the 1DS!), and although at present I think
the images require a little more USM, they appear as good as those
from the 1DS (up to A3), and indeed better, in terms of noise and
dynamic range, IMO.
I think that there will be much comment of the 1D MkII having
issues with softness in these forums, when it is widely available,
because of it's cheaper price and wider usage with photographers
that tend not to use L glass.
Do you remember the sudden increase in signal-to-noise ratio on
these forums when the 10D was released?
Here's Michael's review of the 400 F5.6 with crops from the 1DS
which have been post processed - he says that he doesn't have a
Duff 100-400L and we all know the 400 F5.6 to be a Stellar lens
wide open so it may give an idea as to the sort of glass needed to
make the most of these big CMOS Cameras..
the 1D Mk1 of course gets pixel level sharper than even the 1DS +
400 F5.6 - even with a crappola plastic mount consumer 80-200
F4.5-5.6 let alone an L but then it's not 8.2 or 11Mp is it.. I
very much doubt that there will EVER be an 8 + Mp camera with 1D
Mk1 sharpness unless Foveon pull their fingers out
just have to reside ourselves to that
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
100% Crops from a 1D Mk1 using an old Sigma 170-500 (not exactly
known for being the best lens on earth) WIDE OPEN
And for a REAL Laugh - Sigma 28-300 Compact 1D RAW 100% crops Wide
open
I guess that I won't get the same performance from a Mk2 ;-)
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
EOS-1D - Sigma SD9
--This post reminds me of when I first received my 1DS and, to my
horror, realised all the images coming from it were distinctly soft
at 100%, or in large print. Previously i had owned a D60, which
reinvigorated my passion in photography (although the plastic
build and AF left much to be desired), and I generally used the
Canon 50mm 1.4 and 28-135mm non-L zoom with it.
When I received the 1DS (I received it before many of the reviews
were published so was unaware of how harsh it was on poorer glass)
I put these lenses straight to use with it and started shooting
using a similar workflow to before...hence my disappointment.
Cheaper lenses cannot maintain quality across the film plane and at
various apertures, when using such a high resolving sensor.
As you can imagine I switched most of my lenses to better quality L
glass (although I love the 50mm 1.4), and found that the 1DS was
really quite incredibly sharp. I am still in awe of how
3-dimensional some images can look from that camera.
I have owned the 1D MkII for nearly a week now and must say that it
IS natively sharp. The 16-35mm L lens does not do it justice
(that lens never did on the 1DS!), and although at present I think
the images require a little more USM, they appear as good as those
from the 1DS (up to A3), and indeed better, in terms of noise and
dynamic range, IMO.
I think that there will be much comment of the 1D MkII having
issues with softness in these forums, when it is widely available,
because of it's cheaper price and wider usage with photographers
that tend not to use L glass.
Do you remember the sudden increase in signal-to-noise ratio on
these forums when the 10D was released?
I think MR's lens review summed it up even though it was the 1DS - the 100-400L maybe great on a D30 or D60 but doesn't cut it on a 1DS was his summary somewhere, same for the 28-135IS and It's not just about soft corners..
--
Well, you (may) have seen the crops from the Mk1 and Sigma 28-300 I posted above, as you can imagine, that lens won't be seeing the Mk2, It's now resting on an old D30 we picked up for Rach as a kickabout - works on that as well as it does on the 1D (Old AF system likes Sigma lenses I guess) .. I sold the 28-135IS as it's not as good as hers and knew it wouldn't cut muster on the Mk2 as it didn't on my mate's 1DS..
--
Well you've got a good lineup - you MAY find the far less compromised 24-70L a far better choice as on a 1.3X body you get about an effective 31-90mm which is excellent - It's a way better lens than ANY Ultra wide angle, prime, zoom or otherwise
