DSLRUsers.com

Interesting comments.

Love those full frame ultra wide shots... have a look if interested.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/5d-d200.htm

As usual, some of it I agree with (auto ISO would be very nice, as would more fps), and some of it is just irrelevant (poor jpegs... I wasn't aware of that until I read Ken's article because I shoot RAW 90% of the time). In a way, he's picked up exactly what Canon did - they gutted a proper camera to make a cheap full frame model that working professionals wouldn't buy because they need the features found in pro cameras, but amateurs would snap up because for the money you can't get a better camera. The 300D all over again.

The cost of the next step up is pretty horrid, although I admit I'm more tempted by a second hand 1Ds than the 5D (both 12MP, one is bigger, heavier and better at almost everything as well as cheaper and free from warranty).

As is typical for Ken, a lot of his criticism of the 5D comes down to one point. In this case, "I refuse to shoot RAW and that sucks".

moz wrote:In a way, he's picked up exactly what Canon did - they gutted a proper camera to make a cheap full frame model that working professionals wouldn't buy because they need the features found in pro cameras

There are many types of photographers in the world, but I have been involved in conversations at AIPP events where there were _many_ pros commenting how the 5D suited their needs better than a 1Ds! Not every pro needs full weatherproofing and battle-hardening, and many comment that they like the 5D images better than the 1Ds Mk.II. Being able to afford spare bodies helps too (it may be a deductable business expense, but that doesn't mean cost is no concern!).

The cost of the next step up is pretty horrid, although I admit I'm more tempted by a second hand 1Ds than the 5D (both 12MP, one is bigger, heavier and better at almost everything as well as cheaper and free from warranty).

I've used the 1Ds Mk.II and the 5D, and it's clear that for me the 5D wins hands-down (I'm just waiting to see what comes down the pipe this year). As for the 1Ds Mk.I, not only is the user interface so much different from the D30/D60/10D/20D/30D/5D style that I've used since 2000, but the image quality is easily surpassed by the 5D.
But if you want a 1Ds then feel free!

As is typical for Ken, a lot of his criticism of the 5D comes down to one point. In this case, "I refuse to shoot RAW and that sucks".

Working out the details of Ken's biases can be amusing. Often they're obvious!  BTW, to me the D200 and 5D are different classes of camera.

Notice the language used isn't "the" canon but my canon vs my nikon.... who really needs to compare each camera head to head anyway? for a camera of that level/range, it's not exactly a beginner's camera and by the time one is ready to upgrade to that stage, you would have bought into either the Nikon or Canon system already.

DaveB wrote:I've used the 1Ds Mk.II and the 5D, and it's clear that for me the 5D wins hands-down... 1Ds Mk.I, not only is the user interface so much different from the (consumer) style that I've used since 2000, but the image quality is easily surpassed by the 5D.

Interesting. I've only played with a 1D series, never used one for anything other than the "oh, a camera" type shots. With the 5D I found it annoying next to the 30D becaise it so nearly is a better 30D but the extras from 20D-30D are more worth while than I expected.

So like you I'm waiting for the successor to the 5D to see what Canon give us.

Moz, I'm amused that you translated "D30/D60/10D/20D/30D/5D" to "consumer". I can understand "300D/350D/400D" being characterised as "consumer", but the D30 et al cameras definitely qualify as "pro" cameras for the purposes of Canon Professional Services membership...

Damn these emotive labels!