[JWP]

At the moment I have a 1 dmk 2but I am looking to do more studio and wedding work. Now do I get 5d or 1ds. price is not a problem

But I am having a problem making my mind. yes 1ds is an outstanding camera, but reading the reviews of the 5d is also outstanding camera.

so looking for feedback on the two cameras

[dazzajl]

What kind of studio work are you thinking of and what sort of output size are you going to be needing?

There are plenty of people doing weddings and studio stuff on lower spec cameras than the 1d II, not that I'm saying you should but there may be better places to spend your cash to make up the perfect outfit.

[SammyC]

What's the difference in price?

[IanC_UK]

5d = £1799
1ds Mk2 = £4599 !!!!

[CT]

Originally Posted by SammyC

What's the difference in price?

About £2.5K to £3K!

If I was still doing weddings I'd be more than happy to use the1D Mk2. With the 17-40L you'd get an actual 22mm FOV which is more than wide enough for the biggest groups and interior shots - beyond that, distortion starts to become a serious consideration for wedding work. I can't see a pressing need for the full frame unless you're going to be making really big prints which is when the extra pixels will really become apparent.

Having once done 3 Saturday weddings on the trot in nightmare downpours, I would really appreciate the weather resistance of the 1DMK2. You get that advantage with the 1DS Mark2 as well of course.

If you really need the full frame, the 5D is a bargain, but if money is no object it's really a no-brainer, just get the 1DS Mark2.

[JWP]

the studio work will mainly be of portraits, shoot in a studio or on location at client houses.

[Liberalis]

If you can justify it, go for the 1Ds, as long as you dont need the frame rate.

Seems more future proof to me.

[CT]

Originally Posted by Liberalis

If you can justify it, go for the 1Ds, as long as you dont need the frame rate.

Seems more future proof to me.

Fair comment there Kris - 17 million pixels isn't going out of fashion any time soon. I'm just a bit surprised they haven't brought out an n version of the 1Ds yet if only for the bigger LCD screen, which all the competitors are doing. It does make you wonder if there's a new model in the offing, but even if there is I would think it's going to be around 20-21 million pixels which is where most informed people seem to think the pixel war is going to end. The full frame sensor on the 1DS already represents well over 50% of the production cost of the camera.

[SammyC]

If they have trouble getting the 17 Mp sensor together i.e. yields are still low I'm guessing a 20-21 Mp sensor is going to be even more expensive!

[dazzajl]

I would think it's going to be around 20-21 million pixels which is where most informed people seem to think the pixel war is going to end

I'm not at all sure Canon will want to go there.... but then we all know I'm not one of the informed people.

The problem there is that very few (if any) of the current Canon lenses will be able to cope with the resolution of the chip. I've seen some great images from the 1dS II but the common complaint is that the lenses are stretched to thier very limits.

Just to give an example, I have a 17MP digi back with a sensor size closer to 645 than 35mm and use it with a mamiya and a large format camera. The difference between the two sets of lenses is surprisingly apparent. The mamiya lenses are desinged to work with film slightly larger than the sensor yet still fall quite a way short of the Digitar lenses on the 5x4 camera that are designed specifically for digi backs.

How does any of this relate to the original question? I'm not too sure really, as I don't think either choice will represent a significantly better tool for the job than the 1d II. The Ds II will ofer a larger file size but some of the quality increase is going to be lost with the lenese not coping as well. Particularly for wedding work. The 5D, whilst a great camera may not be tough enough to take all the knocks and soakings and still produce the goods...... every time.

Dunno, probably not helping my am I.

[CT]

Well when they increased the pixel count from 11 million to 17 milion pixels with the 1DS Mark2, the price actually decreased quite substantially. The orginal version was well over 6K body only, so they are producing them more cheaply, and Canon producing the 5D at the price they have seems to imply they may yet go mainstream with full frame?

[CT]

I totally agree with your last post Daz, particularly on the lenses being the limiting factor. Seeing as you need to quadruple pixel count to gain a doubling of resolution, I can't see the need for much more in the way of pixels.

[SammyC]

Sounds like they may have got much better yields out of the fab then these days.