Canon 1D Mark IIN v. EOS5

[macgyver]

We can't answer that question for you, only you can based on your knowledge of your shooting style and subject.

That being said...

Think about your shooting in the past.  Are you constantly frustrated by your burst rate and buffer speed (like I am) or do you find yourself wishing you had superior image size and quality.

While I have no experiance in the area of surfing, I have to imagine that the burst speed and buffer would be helpful.  Me, personally, I would get the 1D, but thats me.

-mavgyver

[PeteWalsh]

I think it's hard to go past the 1DMKII if you're into sports of any kind - the speed, performance and durability, coupled with the 1.3 that is handy shooting with tele's and not too much of a handicap with wides.

If you could score a 1DMKII at a significantly cheaper price than the 'n' I'd say go for it, but if it's only a small amount might as well shell it out for the 'n' as Canon may never get around to releasing a firmware update for the 1DMKII to add some of the 'n' like features to it.

[Buttkicker]

I have the same dilema, and hav opted to get the new 1dmk2N I shoot lots of sports and the autofocus on the 20D is good, but I feel the 1d camera will be rather better
I believe for sports shooting the 5d is no better than the 20d

[Jonathan Wienke]

The 1D-MkII uses the 1-series 45-point AF system which is the best Canon makes, while the 5D uses a system based on the one found in the 20D. The 45-point system is faster, more accurate, will function wil lenses with smaller maximum apertures, and will work in lower light than the less-expensive systems in the cheaper cameras. If fast and accurate low-light AF is more important important to you than the extra 5MP, you should consider the 1-series body rather than the 5D.

[scubastu]

No more surprised than I am.  I was blown away by the quality of the image.  If Moose Peterson creates 30x40 prints from 4MP D2h files...then why can't you get 20x30 files from a 6.3MP camera? The output device is also important.  I printed on a Kodak LED photo printer...of course, you need a good image to start with.

s.

[ny_surfer]

This is a common problem I am sure, but I don't know what to do.
I am not a professional photographer, but like to have good equipment to post pics on my website My Website
I currently have a 20D and a 300mm IS USM Lens (I have to update my equipment page)
The thing is I cant decide if it is better to have 8.5 frames per second at 8 Megs with a 1.3 conversion factor or 3 frames per second at 12.8 megs with full frame.
I shoot surfing pictures and some other stuff and I think that 3FPS is probably good enough but am not sure.

I particularly like the 0 Conversion factor on the EOS5 for super wide angle with an underwater housing but I just don't know.  Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Lastly, what do you think that I can get for a used 20D like new condition with the battery grip and a second battery?

[ny_surfer]

I am leaning towards the 1D, I think that it is probably a better camera for my purposes but further input would certainly be appreciated.

Do you think that it would be wise to wait for the N version to be released and then try to score a non N at a better price? Or are the improvements worth the extra $$?

[Big Bird]

No question here, get the Mark II, the AF and frame rate are what you need. Just gets lots of flash storage and burn a lot of frames and pick out the best. The fast fps makes a huge difference in getting the image you want.

[ny_surfer]

Thanks for the input. Do you know if the auto focus is faster on the 1dmarkIIN and if so how much faster?

[scubastu]

As primarily an underwater shooter, I can say for certain that you don't need fast AF, just accurate AF.  Also, take note, the BBC Wildlife Photo of the Year was a shot made by Doug Perrine with the Canon D60.  If you can't get good images with 8MP, 12.8 won't help much, not to mention the wait you will have for housings to be released for the 5D.  There are a lot of housings out for the 20D.

I think you qualified you needs in your opening statement, you're posting them on a website.  Web images are typically 6---800 pixel at it's longest dimension.  You won't be able to tell between a 6,8 or 12MP shot from that.  I shoot with a 10D in a Subal housing.  While not a full time photo pro, I've sold both topside and underwater images taken with the 10D.  20x30 blowups of thimble sized pygmy seahorses show amazing detail.

The primary reason for my going to a 5D is the Wide Angle use.  My 15mm Fisheye and 16-35L will once again regain their full image circle capability.  Now, I can use my 16-35L and still be within reasonable range to say a whale shark or encompass more of the reef scene I'm taking while still allowing me to get close in an light the scene with my strobes.

Compared to flying birds, surfers are relatively slow, many outstanding flight images are taken with 3-5fps cameras.  The 5D has the buffer size to capture a good 5 sec (if shooting RAW) run of a surfer or about 13 secs in JPG....you'll likely have a good chance of capturing what you want...the 20D also has a decent buffer size for JPGs.

If you're not making money at it, if it's a financial stretch for you to get a 5D or 1D...keep the 20D and shoot it...LOTS. Housings for the 20D will be subtantially cheaper than the 1D's and still cheaper than the 5D.  But, if money's no problem, do what you want!

My 2 cents.

s.

[ny_surfer]

That was informative.  I am surprised that you get a real good print at 20x30.

I still have not decided what to do. the question between full frame or 1.3 and the differences between the focus points in addition to the megs is a very hard one to make.  Money is always an issue but I could probably go either way. I do not make money from my pics.