Canon EOS 1D MII or Canon EOS 5D MIV
Jan 23, 2017 00:59:42 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
jim10ec wrote:
I have been a Canon user for a long time currently... (show quote)
I saw 300+ Getty Images, taken by pros using the Canon 1DX Mark 2 Camera, at the Summer Olympics in Brazil, 2016. Many were taken with the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 lens, and some with the 24-70mm f2.8.. Canon was the official camera at that Olympics. Those Getty Images were excellent.
Jan 23, 2017 12:02:58 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
I'd say neither. Both are full frame cameras. For sports I prefer a crop sensor camera. So I'd stick with 7D Mark II. It's excellent for that purpose and for sports shooting there is very little to be gained from either of the FF models.
Between the two FF models, the 1DX II is the more "sports oriented" model. Using the 70-200/2.8 now on 7DII.
BTW, your headline and original post mention two very different 1D-series models interchangeably... "1D Mark II" is an 8MP, APS-H camera that was manufactured around 2003 or 2004, the 1D Mark IIN replaced it pretty quickly, in 2005. "1DX Mark II" is a 20MP, full frame model currently in production. Pretty sure you mean the latter, based upon the prices you mention.
1DX Mark II is a top-of-the-line, superb sports camera.... ... However, since you say you use 70-200/2.8 with APS-C, with full frame you may want a 300/2.8 or a 120-300/2.8 zoom.... Compare the price/size/weight of those versus your 70-200 and consider how it will effect your mobility. The folks who have assistants and golf carts to carry their gear and whose employers buy them cameras and lenses are welcome to the full frame sports cameras! I'll stick with my pair of 7DII, which are almost as capable and more than adequate for the vast majority of sports/action/wildlige purposes. For various other work such as low light, portraits, scenic, architecture, I've been using a 5DII for some years. First it was alongside original 7D for about five years and now along with 7DII. I will very likely upgrade that to 5DIV soon.
5DS-R someone suggested is great camera too, but not as good for low light/high ISO work and definitely not ideal for sports/action/wildlife shots because it's a generally "slower" camera than the 5DIV or 1DXII. I don't kn ow about you, but I really don't need 50MP images either. 30MP would be great, 21MP has been fine up to now!
If money is burning a hole in your pocket, there are some great lenses you might want to consider. IMO, since you already have one of the best sports/action cameras available, a camera "upgrade" would bring far less benefit than additional, high quality glass.
Between the two FF models, the 1DX II is the more "sports oriented" model. Using the 70-200/2.8 now on 7DII.
BTW, your headline and original post mention two very different 1D-series models interchangeably... "1D Mark II" is an 8MP, APS-H camera that was manufactured around 2003 or 2004, the 1D Mark IIN replaced it pretty quickly, in 2005. "1DX Mark II" is a 20MP, full frame model currently in production. Pretty sure you mean the latter, based upon the prices you mention.
1DX Mark II is a top-of-the-line, superb sports camera.... ... However, since you say you use 70-200/2.8 with APS-C, with full frame you may want a 300/2.8 or a 120-300/2.8 zoom.... Compare the price/size/weight of those versus your 70-200 and consider how it will effect your mobility. The folks who have assistants and golf carts to carry their gear and whose employers buy them cameras and lenses are welcome to the full frame sports cameras! I'll stick with my pair of 7DII, which are almost as capable and more than adequate for the vast majority of sports/action/wildlige purposes. For various other work such as low light, portraits, scenic, architecture, I've been using a 5DII for some years. First it was alongside original 7D for about five years and now along with 7DII. I will very likely upgrade that to 5DIV soon.
5DS-R someone suggested is great camera too, but not as good for low light/high ISO work and definitely not ideal for sports/action/wildlife shots because it's a generally "slower" camera than the 5DIV or 1DXII. I don't kn ow about you, but I really don't need 50MP images either. 30MP would be great, 21MP has been fine up to now!
If money is burning a hole in your pocket, there are some great lenses you might want to consider. IMO, since you already have one of the best sports/action cameras available, a camera "upgrade" would bring far less benefit than additional, high quality glass.
Jan 23, 2017 12:40:49 #
You could throw aMk III teleconvertor on the 70-200 or look at the 100-400 Mk II as a good longer lens.
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Jan 23, 2017 14:08:06 #
Sorry it was supposed to say "EOS-1D X Mark II", guess the fingers just missed the "X"! Please forgive my fingers for missing that.
Jan 23, 2017 15:25:47 #
I pardon your transgression Jim...lol
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Jan 23, 2017 20:02:42 #
jim10ec wrote:
Sorry it was supposed to say "EOS-1D X Mark II", guess the fingers just missed the "X"! Please forgive my fingers for missing that.
Hopefully, not done by your shutter finger.....
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.