Now to be honest with you all, I don’t consider myself a professional photographer, but rather it just a hobby of mine. I have read many of the reviews and many of the comparisons between other cameras and I have to say my 3 weeks of experience with this camera certainly lines well with the reviews. I have no real way to compare the 5D2 with any of the more interesting camera such as the Canon 50D, 1D3, or the Nikon D3. There are plenty of other reviews available that covers this angle of the 5D2 story. I have not seen much real life reviews of the camera, so I figure I take this opportunity to write a review based on real life conditions. To put things in the proper context, I am upgrading from the Canon EOS Rebel XT. I had considered upgrading to the 40D, but I felt that it was not enough bang for me to upgrade. The Canon 5D Mark II offered the bang I was looking to achieve and I truly believe it was worth every penny.

I view myself as a generalist and do not focus on one area of photography. I have one camera (new 5D2) and a bunch of L lenses for the camera. If there is a picture to take, I take it and so far, I found the Canon 5D Mark II to be able to handle just about any thing. The camera is not just for weddings!

In this review, I will share some photo I have taken so far as well as cover my favorite features of the camera. Most of my sample photos will be JPEG right from the camera with the NR set to standard. In the past, I would shoot RAW and I would post process my RAW with Bibble Pro 4.10. But at this time, Bibble does not support the 5D2 as of yet and the DPP is frankly too slow for me. I have recently considered changing to Photoshop, but I have decided that I rather buy a new L lense then pay for PhotoShop. I have a license for Bibble and it a great product and will just have to wait until Bibble can support the 5D2. Certainly, I have RAW versions of all my photos and plan on experimenting with Cropping and evaluating its NR capabilities with the 5D2 once Bibble Pro 5 comes out with 5D2 support. Lucky for me, the 5D2 is producing awesome JPEG pictures right out of the camera which is allowing me to wait.

First up is Indoor Basketball shoots. I have hundreds of them so far. This one was taken in bad lighting conditions in an old gym. I used my Canon 24-70 F2.8 Lens with an Exposure Time of 1/250Sec, F-Stop 2.8, and ISO 3200. This photo came right out of the camera with no adjustments. The white balance is great and the colors are perfect. It has some noise, but certainly this can easily be clean up.

Here is another shot in a gym where the lighting conditions where much better. I used my Canon 24-70 F2.8 Lens again with an Exposure Time of 1/320Sec, F-Stop 3.2, and ISO 1600. This photo came right out of the camera with no adjustments. The white balance is great and the colors are perfect. Interesting in this gym, I have the camera set to Tv Priority set at 1/320 and auto ISO enabled. What I like about the 5D2 is that the F-stop will float between 3.2 and 2.8 (not sure why) but more importantly, the ISO will adjust down and low as possible (which I like a lot). For this lighting condition, the ISO seems to float between 1000 and 2500. The lighting changes slightly depending on where I am sitting in the gym and how far I have zoomed in or out the lens.

This next shot I had the camera set to full automatic. I don’t always use full automatic, but I wanted to see what the 5D2 would do in this condition. The 5D2 use ISO 100, F-stop of 8, and Exposure of 1/640 Sec. I used my Canon 70-200 F4 IS lenses for this shoot.

DIGIC 4 imaging processor

Comparing the 5D2 with my old Canon EOS Rebel XT (350D), one of the first things you will notice is the imaging processor capabilities in the 5D2. It seemed that just about every picture I had taken with the Rebel XT, needed some adjustments to the photo and why I always shot RAW. I had to adjust the White Balance, noise for ISO 800 or 1600, and at times, even the color was not quite right. However with the new DIGIC 4 image processor, I am seeing the colors and the white balance more under control and even more exciting, it has a built in Noise Reduction capability. Unscientifically of course, if you compare the JPEG coming right out of the camera, you notice a major difference in over all quality.

Being a Full Frame camera, right off the bat, you will notice a 1 F-Stop advantage over a crop camera such as the Rebel XT in respect to controlling the Exposure Time. In addition, using DPP and reviewing RAW files and comparing old basketball photo I had at 1600 and comparing them with the new basketball photo I have with the 5D2, I can notice the difference right away. The 350D at 1600 was not always usable. It depended a lot on the lighting conditions. With the 5D2, I am finding that noise level to be very usable up through 6400. To be clear, I do not have formal comparisons (kinda hard to do that with low lighting indoor action sports), but certainly I have been able to clean up a few 6400 test shots I have taken that simply look great. Many times I struggled when using 1600 on the 350D.

The other problem I had with the 350D, is I would set Av priority to a F-Stop of 2.8 and set the ISO to 1600. Many times, I would get blurry pictures because at times, the Exposure Time would be under 1/160 Sec. I did experiment with the under exposing with result of even more noise to deal with. Hard to get a half way decent indoor basketball shoot with bad gym lighting conditions and getting undesirable Exposure Times. Trust me, been there, done that. The 5D2 now gives me the ability to take great shoots even when the lighting conditions are bad.

Wow, for me, one of the biggest things I noticed with the 5D2 is the battery life between charges. When I had my 350D, it had to always have a 2^nd battery with me especially when I used AI SERVO. With the 5D2 and using AI SERVO, I am taking hundreds of shots and coming home with my battery still having 70% or 80% battery power remaining. I could not be any happier here. I almost bought a 2^nd battery for the 5D2, but the sales guy was very honest and said that I may not need it based on why I had a second one for the 350D. He was correct. I appreciate the honesty I got from them at www.cameracompany.com.

In addition, the 5D2 offers the ability to give you Battery status information such as the percentage remaining and the number of shots remaining. The 350D did not have this ability. In respect to basketball photos I have been taking, I found the Auto Focus with AI SERVO enable to be really fast as compare to the 350D I am use too. Many times with the 350D, I would loose a shot because the Auto Focus was simply not ready and fast enough. For the 5D2, I have yet to miss a picture I wanted; always focused and ready to go.

For a guy like me who is over 40 now, the screen on the 350D was just becoming a problem for me. The 5D2 3” LCD Screen is not only much bigger, but it also very sharp. The two things you need when you’re over 40. So if your over 40, this screen is a must have. Similar to the 350D, it does offer the ability to zoom in and out when reviewing photos, but what different is that the photo remains sharp as you zoom in. Also, it has a very nice button that they call their multi-controller which allows mouse like ability to move your picture up and down or left to right, very easily.

Menu System

Bottom line, it is very easy and simple! Just the way I like it. In addition, I was able to customize my very own screen. The only negative I will say is when I took the Ski photo above, I discovered that the customize Screen is not available if you are in full auto mode. For me, I don’t use full Auto Mode very often, but I do think this is a ridiculous restriction that Canon should consider removing. In respect to the 350D, the menu system is a major improvement with the 5D2.

Continues Shooting

The 5D2 has the ability to take 3.9 Shots per second which is slightly faster then the 350D. The 50D can perform at 6.3 shots per second with the 40D slightly faster. Given that some of my pictures are indoor sports, I debated for some time if I should go with the 50D or the 5D2. At the end, I went with the 5D2 because of the much better sensor that can handle low lighting conditions much better then the 50D. Putting the sensor to the side, simply having the 1 stop advantage being a full frame camera means you can basically double your Exposure time which is important for indoor sports pictures. I have never tried using a 50D or a 40D, but so far, I have been able to get great actions shots without the 6.3 advantage.

Video

So far, it appears to be working very well. I felt it was important to mention it, but at this point in time, I have not spent a lot of time using it in some real world scene.

Black Dots

Given all of the buzz about black dots, I thought it was important to mention the situation. The 5D2 can produce black dots that can be seen when shooting in very low lighting and you are taking a picture of street lights or Christmas lights. Based on what I read, they can be seen when you crop the photo by 100%. If you look closely, you will see a black dot in the middle of the light. Good news is Canon has acknowledged the problem and plans a firmware upgrade at some point to address the problem. My personal view is I have never seen the issue with my camera but then again, I never had an opportunity to take pictures on the conditions required to see this problem.

Final Thoughts

I am sure you can tell that I am quite pleased with this camera. 5D2 is an awesome camera. I feel the 5D2 has a solid control of its noise performance up to ISO 6400. I now have the ability to take much improved indoor sport pictures. I am sure the Nikon D3 or 700 or the Canon 1D3 can take solid indoor sport pictures as well, but given the price point and where I am as a hobbyist today, the 5D2 is a create camera and great option for me.

• 24.5 megapixel in a 35.9 x 24 mm CMOS sensor
• 16-bit EXPEED system
• 5.0 frames-per-second in it’s full size mode, and 7 frames-per-second in a cropped 10 megapixel mode (I guess they want to encourage people who need the extra 2 frames-per-second to purchase the D3)
• ISO 50-6400, which I’m guessing means that, like the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III (highest ISO is 3200), this dSLR is not intended for low light situations as with the D3 is. There doesn’t seem to be any mention of any higher ISO range such as 12,800 or 25,600.
• Same 3 inch 922,000 LCD
• Live View
• 12ms startup time with a 41ms shutter lag
• Dual Compact Flash slots capable of 35MB/second write times

For pictures of the Nikon Pro magazine and how the D3x stacks up against the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III, click in to read more.

Comparison of Nikon D3x and Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III

As always, this comparison is only a comparison based on specifications. Colors, performance, ergonomics, and other features are subjective and can’t quite be measured without bias.

Conclusion

Nikon definitely doesn’t disappoint with their high resolution D3x. The D3 was aimed at photojournalist, wedding photographers and sports photographer, much like the D2h and D2hs was. The D3x is aimed at those who need higher resolution such as studio and landscape photographers. This is not to say the D3x can’t be used for photojournalism, wedding photography, and/or sports photography. I’m pretty sure a number of wedding photographers will pick up a D3x to complement their D3.

Canon has certainly fell a bit further behind with their 1Ds Mark III compared to the (yet-to-be-released) D3x. Things such as the outdated, crappy 3.0 LCD screen with a laughable 230,000 pixel and maximum ISO of 3200. The D3x has the same ISO levels (performance will be another thing to be seen) as the Canon EOS 1D Mark III, a 10 megapixel dSLR. I certainly like the D3/D3x’s dual Compact Flash slots, but I can see the advantages of having a Compact Flash slot and a SD/SDHC slot as a) if you are shooting in situations where your memory card can be confiscated, at least with the SD/SDHC, it’s not as easily noticed; b) SD/SDHC has attained (and in some cases surpassed) Compact Flash speeds; and c) more laptops are more likely to have a SD/SDHC built in reader than a built-in Compact Flash reader.

I’ve always liked how Nikon has offered a “cropped” mode, first introduced in the D2x, and has remained in the D3, and now also seen in the D3x. By allowing the photographer to switch to a lower megapixel selection, they can attain extra frames-per-second.

One thing of interest is that the HD video feature first introduced in the D90 does not appear in the new D3x. Does Nikon not feel it’s ready for the pros? So us Canon shooters will now continue to wait and see what is in store with the Canon EOS 1D/1Ds Mark IV. Kudos Nikon, you certainly are listening to your users.

© Engadget.com

© Engadget.com

For a $4,000 difference between the 1D, the 1Ds emblems are gold plated

Sooo, if you’ve been following me on Twitter, you may have noticed my mention of a “new toy”. Well, the wait’s over, my new toy is a camera. Not any camera, but Canon’s top-top of the line, the much sought after and highly desired Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II. Up until August 2007, it had been the highest megapixel camera for a full frame (or even cropped sensors) 35mm digital sensor. Introduced in September 2004, it took the photography world by storm offering the most megapixel at the time in a full frame sensor. The Canon EOS 1Ds (mark I) was the first dSLR to feature a full frame sensor with the Kodak DCN-14n following suite.

All this for only eight thousand dollars ($8,000). So, yea. Quite out of reach even for many professionals photographers.

I already currently own a Canon EOS 1D Mark II, which up to this point served as my primary body with a Canon EOS 5D as my secondary/backup body. I’ve been itching for another 1D body, as it makes sense to have identical bodies when shooting fast paced events such as wedding because all the controls, menu layout, and functionality are identical. So when an opportunity arose, I jumped, and now I’m a proud owner of a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II.

Canon EOS 1D Mark II versus Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II

There are more similarities than differences between the 1D Mark II and 1Ds Mark II. Here’s a quick comparison:

The biggest differences are: sensor size, resolution/megapixels, crop factor, and continous drive. You can’t really compare these two SLRs to each other because they serve two entirely different functions. Obviously from the specs, the Canon EOS 1D Mark II is a sport/photojournalist photographer’s camera. At the sacrifice of resolution (8.2 MP versus 16.7 MP), the Canon EOS 1D Mark II can burst up to 8.5 frames-per-second, which was the fastest dSLR until the Nikon D3 and Canon EOS 1D Mark III were introduced. The 1D Mark II also can store more images in it’s buffer (40 versus 32), most likely due to the resolution differences. On the issue of crop factor, it has been my experience, that sport and to some degree, most photojournalists, enjoy the crop factor because of the perceived “reach”. But on the other hand, having a full frame sensor allows all lenses attached to the 1Ds Mark II to utilize it’s native focal length, so 16mm is really 16mm and not an equivalent to 20mm.

So if the 1D Mark II is primarily for sports and photojournalism, then what is the 1Ds Mark II’s primary role? Obviously photojournalism is one area where you need the use of wide angle and super wide angle lenses. That’s one of the reasons why the Nikon D3 is popular among photojournalist: speed, full frame, high ISO capabilities, and in my opinion the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED N lens (the sharpest wide angle lens currently). Landscape photography is another great use. Although the Canon EOS 5D is used by a lot of landscape photographers and cost considerably less, there are a number of landscape photographers who need or want the extra four million megapixels along with superior weather sealing. But I think one of the biggest selling point for the 1Ds Mark II is portrait photography. The images produced by the 1Ds Mark II when used in portrait photography is nothing less than spectacular. Just look at the images on Flickr taken by the 1Ds Mark II. This isn’t to say you can’t use a 1Ds Mark II for sports photography, but it’s like you wouldn’t use a chain saw to cut carrots. It works, but not quite exactly the right tool for the job.

Conclusion

So how will the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II serve me? Well for wedding photography, the Canon EOS 1D Mark II will be for fast paced action scenes such as bouquet toss, garter toss, first kiss, ring exchange, the dances (father/daughter, mother/son, first dance) and anything else where I might need the 8.5 fps burst speed. The 1Ds Mark II will be for the formal portraits, tender moments, etc. Most likely I’ll be using my Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM on the 1D Mark II because I usually don’t need super wide angle and the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM on the 1Ds Mark II because I generally don’t need super reach, but I do like the bokeh produced by using a telephoto zoom lens on a full frame body.

The biggest advantage of shooting with a 1D Mark II and 1Ds Mark II is that the menu and camera functionality, for the most part, are identical. Switching ISO is the same exact two buttons. Reviewing images are the same buttons, changing focus, etc. Plus both the Mark II’s use the same NP-E3 Ni-MH batteries which mean I only have to lug around one charger. Also both the Mark II’s use dual memory storage for images so I can easily have a backup of all the images I take.

Be on the lookout for my 1D Mark II and 1Ds Mark II review with pictures coming soon.

• Full frame with 21.1 MP, certainly quite a bit of megapixels
• EOS Integrated Cleaning System
• Digic 4 with 14 bit A/D conversion
• Max JPEG sizes of 5616 x 3744
• 9-point TTL CMOS AF sensor with 6 “Invisible Assist points” (a bit disappointing that they didn’t roll the 45 point AF sensor into the new 5D Mark II)
• ISO 100-6400 with 50, 12800, and 25,600 with expansion (YES!)
• 3.0″ TFT LCD with 920,000 pixels
• Live View with 30 fps
• Movie recording capabilities of 1920 x 1080 at 30 fps
• No built in flash (I’m sure a lot of people are disappointed given that Nikon did it in the D700)
• 3.9 frames-per-second continuous burst for 78 frames (310 with UDMA card)

So Canon has certainly heard Nikon’s challenge (but not apparently heard it loud enough), but is this enough to win back some of the pro who switched? I’m not sure. Some of the biggest draw back for photographers who shoot in low light (wedding photography) and/or sports (and the likes) is the weak auto focus (seems like the same exact AF as the 5D) and weak frame rate (3.9). Certainly for landscape photography, 9 auto focus points is usually fine. Also being able to shoot at ISO 25,600 is certainly very, very appealing. I’m not as impressed as I thought I would be and at this point, I don’t think I would purchase the new 5D Mark II. But once we start seeing some actual production model images, who knows. A lot of us are still waiting for a 1D series that actually works right, perhaps this is one of the reasons why it has the older generation auto focus? Read more about the 5D Mark II with sample videos and specs at DPReview.com. You can also read Canon’s press release here.

Also a new Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM lens was released.

Comparison Chart

Looking at the side-by-side comparison, the 5D Mark II certainly looks promising, but can it compete or even beat the Nikon D700? It’s got more megapixels, which isn’t always a good thing. The viewfinder is bigger, which is always nice, but it’s still not quite like the 1Ds Mark III and D3. It can do video, which I’m not sure is a good thing. Only time will tell.

Here are the specs as reported by DPReview.com:

• 15.5 megapixel CMOS sensor
• Digic 4
• 9 point AF sensors (still nothing compared to the Nikon D300′s 54 point AF)
• ISO 100-3200 with 6400 and 12800
• Different focusing screens
• 3.0″ LCD with 920,000 pixels
• 6.3 frames-per-second for 90 JPEGs with UDMA support

On paper, it looks like Canon is back. This renews my confidence that the new 5D (Mark II?) will definitely be a force to reckon with. Hopefully this will also potentially spell a new Canon EOS 1D Mark III(n?) with an autofocusing system that performs like a 1D and high ISO performance on par with the Nikon D3. Hopefully this signifies a paradigm shift at Canon where they are no longer afraid to put the best of what they have in some of their lower line SLRs like Nikon (D3 versus D700 versus D300).

Canon users rejoice!

Image courtesy of DPReview.com

Specifications

Released back in 2002, the Canon EOS 1Ds was Canon’s flagship model and first digital full frame sensor (35.8 x 23.8 mm) SLR on the market with a cost of nearly $8,000 (which is about the same price as the new Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III when initially released. So what did you get for $8,000? Here’s a brief preview:

• 11.4 megapixel CMOS sensor (JPEG pixel dimensions: 4,064 x 2,704)
• ISO 100-1250 in 1/3 steps (with ISO 50 as a custom function)
• 4 sRGB settings and 1 Adobe RGB
• 45 AF points
• Evaluative, Partial, Spot (3 modes), and Center Weighted Metering modes
• 2.0″ 120,000 pixel LCD
• 87ms mirror black-out
• 30 to 1/8,000 sec shutter speeds with bulb
• 3 frames-per-second (FPS) for up to 10 JPEGs or RAW

For more in-depth features, you can check out DPReview’s 1Ds specifications page. Even by today’s standards, some of the features are obviously dated (such as the 2.0″ LCD screen), but it can still hold it’s own at 11 MP with 45 AF points (still the same number of AF points on the new Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III). The only other cameras that has more AF points is Nikon’s recently released D3, D300, and just announced D700. Also worth mentioning is that Canon started the full frame digial sensor with the 1Ds whereas the Nikon has just started with the D3 and D700.

Build Quality

Solid like a tank; it is a 1D series after all. The button layouts next to and under the LCD are identical to the Canon EOS 1D Mark I. So are the buttons on top and the LCD readout panels and also the menu layout.

Here is an example of a very well used and still functioning Canon EOS 1D Mark II by humanitarian photojouranlist, Karl Grobl when he accidentally dropped his 1D with Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM from about 9 feet while seated on an elephant.

Operation

The Canon 1Ds is certainly not designed to be a sports camera like it’s brother, the Canon EOS 1D; evidenced by the huge difference in frame rates (3 fps versus 8 fps). That is not to say that it can’t be used in sports, it just takes more patience and timing. People who generally purchase the 1Ds are more interested in maximum quality and thus the resolution is hugely different (11 MP versus 4 MP). The 1Ds definitely shines when it comes to landscape photography, studio work, portrait photography, weddings (formal pictures), etc.

From the moment the camera is turned on to when you can actually take a picture, it usually takes about a second; it’s only marginally faster from sleep to wake. This is horrible if you expect to capture shots quickly when the camera is turned off or asleep. But once awake and during operation, it’s much more responsive. Unfortunately for someone who is used to using a Canon EOS 1D Mark II, the 10 image buffer on the 1Ds fills up quickly. The flush time (the amount of time it takes to write the data from the buffer to the compact flash card) is decent, but definitely shows its age when compared to newer cameras like the Canon EOS Rebel XTi/400D and Canon EOS 1D Mark II.

Like the Canon EOS 1D Mark I, the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark I also features an additional external WB sensor. On future 1D/1Ds generations, Canon did away with the external WB sensor. So far I have not noticed any additional benefits of having an additional external white balance sensor or any ill effect, but one person on FredMiranda reports that the external WB sensor can actually have a negative effect:

In my experience, the AWB sensor affected the colors in a bad way as in most cases the light falling on the subject has a different color temperature than that at the camera position. For instance, if you have the sun behind you, the subject is in the sunlight while the sensor is in the shadow. It was a good move from Canon not to continue with it. I find the AWB on my 1Ds2 much better than the 1Ds.
edwardkaraa

I wonder if Nikon’s external WB sensor helps on their D2x and D2xs?

Forgot about being able to review images on the LCD right after you take them. It usually takes a few seconds from when you take the picture to when it actually displays on the rear LCD. Also because the LCD is only 130,000 pixels, you can’t really judge sharpness or colors. It’s best to rely on the histograms. Plus another major disadvantage of the 1Ds LCD is lack of zoom. You can’t zoom in on any images you take. One good thing about having a crappy SLR LCD such as this is that it makes you more reliant on reading histograms (a good thing) and learning to better judge your settings. The more I continued to use the Canon EOS 1Ds, the less I found I was relying on the LCD to tell me whether or not I was taking a good picture, but rather checking histograms for blown highlights and good exposure. The camera LCD isn’t the best thing to judge sharpness, exposure, or colors because of many factors. For one, the image that is displayed on the rear LCD isn’t even the actual image you took, but rather a low resolution JPEG that is created in camera for the purposes of LCD viewing. That’s why when you try to check sharpness of an image you took and it looks jagged and not quite sharp but later extracted on a computer, it looks perfectly fine, that’s why. Another reason is the color discrepancies between the different models of the same brand! For example, the Canon EOS 5D has a slightly greenish hue to it’s LCD, making images appear a bit more green than let’s say the Canon EOS 30D. While I’m not saying you shouldn’t use the rear LCD, it’s a great feature, just make sure you’re using it for how it works best.

In The Field

During the couple of weeks I had the Canon EOS 1Ds, I did quite a number of photojournalism work such as our office’s employee appreciation day and most notably, the 2008 SF Pride Parade. For the 2008 SF Pride Parade, I was using the 1Ds with the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM and the 1D Mark II with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. Having full frame on a super wide angle lens like the 16-35mm allowed me to get shots like this.

Having a full frame SLR allows for some great wide shots especially when in tight situations such as close-up crowds, in small rooms, etc. It’s definitely refreshing when a 16mm lens is actually 16mm and not 20.8mm (1.3x crop factor) or 25.6mm (1.6x crop factor), which may not seem much, but when you get to longer focal lengths like 70mm, on a 1.3x and 1.6x crop sensor becomes 91mm and 112mm, respectively. Although on the flip side, having full frame may not always be advantageous such as when photographing birds or birds in flight, wildlife, and so forth. A full frame SLR requires a longer focal length lens than a 1.6x crop sensor to achieve the same crop.

Noise is problematic for the 1Ds. At ISO 400 and above, noise is quite apparent and gets very bad at ISO 1250. Proper exposure is paramount to keeping noise as low as possible. I highly recommend the technique of Exposing To The Right (ETTR). Software can be used to clean up noise quite well, although at a cost of some sharpness. I personally use Noise Ninja, and would highly recommend them. Here is a 100% crop of a shot of Stripes (our cat) with the 1Ds at 1/25th second at ISO 1000. Here is the same image and crop with Noise Ninja applied using the default 1Ds profile. Here is another example at 1/20th second at ISO 1000 and with Noise Ninja applied.

The 1Ds, shooting in JPEG with sharpness set to level 5 is very sharp; more so than my 1D Mark II, the most likely reason is a weaker AA (anti-aliasing) filter which allows for sharper images at the cost of increased moire. I have noticed that moire is more apparent on the 1Ds. The 1Ds produces very pleasing JPEGs that require little post-processing, provided you get the exposure and white balance correctly. I find at sharpness set to level 5, I rarely have to apply Unsharp Mask in Photoshop whereas on the 1D Mark II at the same sharpness level, I do have to apply Unsharp Mask.

After having used the Canon EOS Rebel XTi/400D for more than a year, picking up a full frame camera with its large and bright viewfinder is a revelation of how truly small and inadequate the 1.6x crop factor viewfinders truly are. The 1Ds, unlike the 5D, has a 100% viewfinder (VF) coverage (the 5D has a 96% coverage) meaning that what you see in the viewfinder is what you get. It’s amazing what a difference of a full frame viewfinder compared to a 1.6x crop sensor viewfinder or even a 1.3x crop sensor viewfinder. The best analogy is with a 1.6x crop viewfinder, it looks like your standing at the beginning of a long tunnel and looking towards the end where there is just some light, but mostly darkness. The 1.3x crop viewfinder feels like you’re in the middle, so the end of the tunnel where the light is fill up more of the darkness and with the full frame viewfinder, you’re right at cusp of the exit, so there is hardly any darkness around.

Conclusions

If you don’t mind the weight (1265g or 2.78lbs), the Canon EOS 1Ds is a great SLR, albeit six years old. Any one who has either used or felt a 1D series camera can attest to the rock solid build quality. These are the kind of cameras that photojournalist use in war zones that can (need to) handle abuse. While it may not necessarily survive a drop, in some cases such as Karl Grobl who dropped his 1D Mark II from an elephant, it will take some degree of abuse, not intentional mind you.

When the 1Ds was first introduced, its asking price was $8,000. Today’s market value is about ~$1850 which is about equivalent to a brand new Canon EOS 5D, the prosumer full frame dSLR.

Noise can be problematic at times, but a noise reduction software such as Noise Ninja can do quite a bit to reduce noise. The camera produces very sharp results because of a weaker AA filter like the Canon EOS 1D Mark I. What is interesting is that normally with a larger sensor (full frame) and decent amount of pixels (~12 MP or less), noise is very well controlled. This is the case with the 5D, but for some reason the 1Ds exhibits quite a bit of noise. Fortunately for the most part, the noise appears in no patterns which makes the images from the 1Ds look like film noise.

So given a choice between a Canon EOS 5D or a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark I, which should one choose? We’ll evaluate the differences and similarities in a future post.

Canon EOS 1Ds Gallery Images

• 12.1 MP Full Frame (FX) 23.9 x 36mm CMOS sensor with EXPEED
• ISO 200-6400 with 12,800 and 25,600 (as options)
• 5 frames-a-second (FPS) with 8 FPS with the optional MB-D10 battery pack
• 3 inch 920,000 pixel LCD display
• 51-point AF system
• Dust Reduction System (which the D3 doesn’t have)
• Pop-up flash

The new Nikon D700 is certainly a beast. If the low noise performance is anything like the D3, I’m sure people will be scooping the Nikon D700 up like hot cakes at almost $3000 a pop. This certainly would be a great backup wedding or sports body to the Nikon D3. The Nikon D700 is definitely missing a very useful option that it’s bigger brother, the D3, has: dual CF cards. Looks like that option is still only available on the flagship professional model. I’m hoping the new Canon EOS 1D Mark IIIn will replace the second slot SD/SDHC with a CF slot like the D3. Check out this comparison shot from DPReview of the Nikon D700 versus the Nikon D3.

Now all that is left is, what does Canon have in store for the new Canon EOS 5D Mark II?

Then I read on 16-9.net‘s website:

The other big news is that development is nearing completion of the Nikon G-Canon EF adaptor which allows this and any other Nikon G lens to be mounted on Canon DSLR bodies –with full aperture control.

I also came across this site from the DPReview.com forums where this one guy mounted the Nikkor 14-24mm on a Canon EOS 5D and did tests. Fortunately that means I don’t need to switch brands because by the beauty of technology, a converter, and heresy, I can use this lens on my Canon EOS 1D Mark II! Now why would I want to use a Nikon lens on a Canon body? Well for starters, it doesn’t really bother me that it is a Nikon lens. And Canon doesn’t offer a lens of this focal length. The closes is the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM Mark II, which is no where near as tack sharp as this lens. Plus the 16-35mm is almost too much of an overlap for me. I already have the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, I would be paying ~$1600 to use 8mm more of wideness. The Nikkor 14-24mm offers me 10mm more and having 14mm versus 16mm on the wide end can make a big difference in many cases. An easier way to analyze all this is to list the pros and cons:

Pros

• 14mm and not a fisheye lens
• f/2.8 aperture lens means it will perform very well in low light situations
• Magnesium alloy body construction
• Sharpest lens to date for the 14-24mm focal lengths even versus prime lens

Cons

• Very expensive at ~$1700 and probably hard to acquire
• Front element design is unable to take a screw on filter for additional protection
• Lens hood offers nothing in the way of front element protection
• Decent focal length
• Need to spend additional money if trying to use this lens on a Canon body

Conclusion

Is this lens worth it? I say yes, very much so. Canon does not offer a zoom lens as wide as this, it does however have a prime lens, the 14mm f/2.8L USM I & II, that is the same focal length, BUT not the same sharpness. For Canon shooters, the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L had long been the photojournalist/wedding photojournalist lens, but I predict that as more and more Canon shooters see how great the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED N lens is; this will be the new preferred lens leading to all sorts of shortages and back orders. Remember how long it took Nikon to meet production demands for the other hugely popular Nikkor lens, the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G?

I’m going to definitely start saving today and for awhile.

[April 28, 2008 EDIT] In my haste of not reading very carefully, apparently using the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 with the 16-9 adapter mounted to a Canon SLR results in MANUAL FOCUS only. While this isn’t generally a big deal for people who photograph landscapes, having manual focus when you are trying to capture fast paced action makes it very difficult. So now I’m back to focusing on the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM.

[January 05, 2008 EDIT] Check out photographer David Clapp’s results on his blog here.