Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

1D Mk iv - 5D Mk ii


Munro 6 39 United Kingdom
28 Jun 2010 7:16PM
I appreciate this is a bit of an unusual one.

Having the opportunity to consider the above bodies I was hoping for some constructive thoughts on the merits of each of the above.

I am all too aware of the usual arguments, ie buy glass as opposed to a body, you can buy 2 5D's for the price of 1 Mk iv, etc etc.

However I am likely to have the opportunity to upgrade my existing camera body (50D) and taking into account that I am interested in durability as well as image quality I was wondering what thoughts others would have.

I tend to take quite general shots and the shots I post here are not always representative of what I take. I Iam looking for the best general purpose body Canon provide as I already have some L glass to accompany whatever I get. I am aware of the crop factor of the Mk iv but I have not seen a comparison of image quality against the 5D.

Whilst the 1Ds Mkiii would satisfy all criteria it is not an option for obvious financial reasons, nor will it ever be.

Regards

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 5 6 1 United Kingdom
28 Jun 2010 9:24PM
I have the 5d Mk II. The Mk IV is excellent for sport and journalism due to the high shutter speed, full weatherproofing, great high iso etc, but in my humble opinion, the 5d mk II is unbelievable, especially for the price. Full frame, so you can fully utilise those gorgeous L series lenses, iso performance up there with the best. I regularly shoot events at over 1000 iso with little or no noise evident.

Buy a 5d mk II and invest in a lens like the 70-200 is usm f/2.8 if you have the other 1200 quid spare!

Best,

Nik Bartram
www.nikbartram.co.uk
gary_d 7 575 13 Wales
28 Jun 2010 9:34PM
I will second that I absolutely love my 5D2.

Regards. - gary
v8dunc 7 333 4 Scotland
28 Jun 2010 10:25PM
I have the mk IV and a IDS MKII the mk iv has the bests autofocus system i have used and excellent noise free pics upto iso 6400,image quality is excellent,still love the ids mkii as well but for different reasons.landscape i use the full frame body,sport i use the mk iv.everything else i use whichever is closer.

The mkiv is obviously better in low light, but i expect the 5d II to be at least as good if not better.

You pays your money........., unless you need the focus system of the mkiv .get a 5 D II

Duncan
dk 10 59 England
29 Jun 2010 11:11AM
FWIW ... I have just had to send my 5D Mk ll for servicing, 15 months after purchase and after fewer than 10k shots. A bit irritating, to say the least. I'm glad I kept my Mk l in reserve; I have also found it useful as a second camera to avoid having to swap lenses too often.
LensYews 6 1.3k 1 United Kingdom
29 Jun 2010 1:07PM
I have the 1dmkIV and can't fault it, aside from the weight after carrying it around for a day. Huge improvement over my 40d, whose's AF system I just don't trust anymore and now just gets used for static shots.

So I'd say it will come down to how you will use the camera, the major differences being the better AF system on the 1d and the more manageable weight of the 5d. If you're after landscapes, portraits or tripod based shots primarily it has to be the 5d, if you are also going for move subjects then perhaps the 1d. Or for a compromise between build and full frame, how about a 1ds mkII
LeeFisher e2
5 59 8 England
29 Jun 2010 7:03PM
I'd go mark iv all day given the choice between the two. I mainly shoot wildlife shots so the auto focus and speed are a real appeal on the mark iv. The image quality of the 5d2 however is fantastic and the camera choice is very dependent on what you are shooting., they make a great combo if you've got the doughWink
fish
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
29 Jun 2010 7:07PM
Looking into your PF, 5D2 would be my suggestion.
stevie e2
10 1.2k 2 United Kingdom
29 Jun 2010 9:38PM
All depends on what you are going to shoot most. If you're going to do everything from landscapes to high-speed sport you need both camerasWink
Munro 6 39 United Kingdom
30 Jun 2010 7:43PM
Thanks for the feedback everyone.

The general consensus seems to be the 5D mkii, unless I am prepared to lash out on both bodies. Alas that won't be happening.......

Problem now seems to lie now in the fact that the 5D is rather thin on the ground. Short supply? or a wind down to a possible upgrade? Anyway I am unlikely to wait for an upgrade as there is sure to be a large price hike for a new model.

Regards
Late 4 9
3 Jul 2010 10:14PM
You haven't said what your main shooting priority is, but as a general all-rounder you're probably right in going for the 5D2. It has probably the best sensor available, both for resolution and high ISO, and it's not as slow as you might think from the reviews. It rattles along at almost 4fps and the AF is better than it's cracked up to be - I was surprised at how good it was for motor sport on servo AF. For long lens photography it is also better than you might think, because if you crop the images to the equivalent of an APS-C 1.6x format you are still left with an 8mp image, which is similar to a 40D for example.

But for long lens action and wildlife, the 1D4 is peerless. It is lightning fast at everything, plus it has the 'reach' advantage of the 1.3x crop sensor. One drawback is that it won't take EF-S lenses so is a bit compromised on the wide-angle end. You can do a DIY mod on the EF-S 10-22 to partly get around this (basically remove the rubber gasket so that the rear of the lens clears the mirror - google it).

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.