Canon 1DX M2
Nov 19, 2018 14:48:09 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Ray, this was shot with a 1Dx mkl at night. I used... (show quote)
Looks pretty solid at 25k ISO. Thanks for your comment!
Nov 19, 2018 15:06:57 #
raymondh wrote:
Looks pretty solid at 25k ISO. Thanks for your comment!
Ray, this was shot at f4. I needed some DoF. BUT with a faster lens and shot at even f2.8, that would drop the ISO to 12.5K, really cleaning it up a lot!!! As it was, I shot at 1/500 at night, so don't need more speed.
On a tripod with a still subject, of course I would have used ISO 100!
I have other shots taken at f1.8 and ISO 4000 if you'd like to see one of those?
SS
Nov 19, 2018 15:40:41 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Ray, this was shot at f4. I needed some DoF. BUT with a faster lens and shot at even f2.8, that would drop the ISO to 12.5K, really cleaning it up a lot!!! As it was, I shot at 1/500 at night, so don't need more speed.
On a tripod with a still subject, of course I would have used ISO 100!
I have other shots taken at f1.8 and ISO 4000 if you'd like to see one of those?
SS
On a tripod with a still subject, of course I would have used ISO 100!
I have other shots taken at f1.8 and ISO 4000 if you'd like to see one of those?
SS
For indoor sports like basketball, I'm looking for fast focusing, relatively noise free ISO that will allow shooting at roughly sp 1250, F2.8.
I have good glass and am inclined to think the 1DXM2 might get me there.
Nov 19, 2018 18:19:05 #
While I have both 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 glass you have to watch the DOF with longer focal lengths and various distances to subject. Some play with numbers in a DOF app can help you get it into your mind.
Nov 19, 2018 21:52:05 #
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
While I have both 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 glass you have to watch the DOF with longer focal lengths and various distances to subject. Some play with numbers in a DOF app can help you get it into your mind.
I have both of these but usually opt for my primes 50/1.4 or 80/1.8. My g.k.'s are still at the elementary age level so I can wander court side.
One thing I've learned is that focus tracking becomes more difficult wide open. DOF allows more keepers @ 2.8 than @ 1.4.
Nov 19, 2018 22:49:32 #
At 20 feet to the subject at f/2.8 and 200mm focal length the DOF is only 6 inches on a 1Dx...
raymondh wrote:
I have both of these but usually opt for my primes 50/1.4 or 80/1.8. My g.k.'s are still at the elementary age level so I can wander court side.
One thing I've learned is that focus tracking becomes more difficult wide open. DOF allows more keepers @ 2.8 than @ 1.4.
One thing I've learned is that focus tracking becomes more difficult wide open. DOF allows more keepers @ 2.8 than @ 1.4.
Nov 19, 2018 22:55:13 #
The ISO is the bigger difference to me between my 1D MkIII and the MkII especially if you are posting on social media like Facebook. I post shots taken with both on my Facebook and I don’t think most people could tell which camera shot which image.
rmorrison1116 wrote:
I bought both my 5DSr and my 5DIV new. At the time... (show quote)
Nov 19, 2018 22:59:39 #
Yes, you can get a 5D4 and 7D2 for the price of a 1Dx2. Now if the 7D3 ever appears that plus a 5D4 would perhaps be an interesting option too.
rmorrison1116 wrote:
I have battery grips for all my DSLR'S. I generally only use them when I need the extra power, or want to look even cooler. With lens and grip, new, the 5DIV is still around $1300 or so cheaper than a 1DXII body.
Nov 24, 2018 14:11:25 #
rmorrison, I don't think I am ready to hang it up and start knitting.
Every shot included was taken with the Canon 1D mark III.
This camera may only have 10.4 mega pixels, but it does shoot 10 frames a second.
That's good enough for me, and all the "Pros'" who bought it at 6,000 new.
Mega, Mega pixels are overrated.
It sells more cameras, to the I gotta have it, it's the newest, it doesn't matter if it's really better crowd
Size does matter.
The more pixels that get crammed onto a senor, they get smaller.
The new 1Dx II is what around 24 mp's?
I will take the 1Dx II, over any camera from any manufactor anyday.
Every shot included was taken with the Canon 1D mark III.
This camera may only have 10.4 mega pixels, but it does shoot 10 frames a second.
That's good enough for me, and all the "Pros'" who bought it at 6,000 new.
Mega, Mega pixels are overrated.
It sells more cameras, to the I gotta have it, it's the newest, it doesn't matter if it's really better crowd
Size does matter.
The more pixels that get crammed onto a senor, they get smaller.
The new 1Dx II is what around 24 mp's?
I will take the 1Dx II, over any camera from any manufactor anyday.
Nov 24, 2018 14:30:01 #
Having both the cameras you mention I will agree that the MkIII can take very good photos and the 1.3 crop factor can be useful at times. But the MkII is a much superior camera in so many ways. Is the 1Dx MkII worth 5 to 10 times the money? That is each person has to decide for themselves. If you are shooting in good light and posting on social media the MkIII will do a great job. If you don’t believe me just look at some of the photos taken with it on Flicker... Given that I don’t shoot the old body much anymore.
zzzynick wrote:
rmorrison, I don't think I am ready to hang it up ... (show quote)
Nov 25, 2018 12:41:26 #
T.O.D. I never said the 1DX II wasn't a better camera.
If I won the lottery. I would buy one in a heartbeat.
What I did say was, I will hold one to my older 1D bodies, until the used X's are around a 1,000 dollars.
I am 65, and I just hope that happens while I can still use the damn thing
If I won the lottery. I would buy one in a heartbeat.
What I did say was, I will hold one to my older 1D bodies, until the used X's are around a 1,000 dollars.
I am 65, and I just hope that happens while I can still use the damn thing
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.