FA+
Shop
196
Views
Views
10
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Photography / Portraits
Species Dog (Other)
Size 572 x 1024
File Size 463.1 kB
Report this content
More from kaanah
Taken at Anthrocon 2009
Category Photography / Portraits
Species Dog (Other)
Size 572 x 1024px
File Size 463.1 kB
Actually there's about a few dozen I've met just recently in the Boise/Nampa/Caldwell/Mountain Home areas, and I'm just now finding a few furs in south central Idaho (what the natives call the Magic Valley), and a few in the Idaho Falls/Rexburg areas along with the north in Moscow and Couer d' Alene. I just found out about all this within the last two months, too. hehehe
Thanks, I'm glad ya liked it. *^^* Pretty much caught you at the right time/angle...although this is about a 60% crop of a full image. You were kinda...on the other side of the convention center from me. *^^*
Out of curiosity, why're you considering the 1DsII over other cameras, or are you just considering buying a camera in general? I have to admit, having shot off of the 1 series as long as I have...I don't regret the purchase in any way, shape, or form. But..always curious about the reason others' are upgrading to "pro gear". *^^*
IE: What's other people's drive to get camera A over camera B?
Out of curiosity, why're you considering the 1DsII over other cameras, or are you just considering buying a camera in general? I have to admit, having shot off of the 1 series as long as I have...I don't regret the purchase in any way, shape, or form. But..always curious about the reason others' are upgrading to "pro gear". *^^*
IE: What's other people's drive to get camera A over camera B?
Well, I've been with Canons for a while, and throughout my experimentation and shooting, I think I have a pretty strong feel for what I want in a body. I'll explain. x)
I started off with an XTi, then sold that to get a 40D later, mainly because I wanted a better-responding body that would hopefully work better and be more durable for moving-subject photos. At about the same time, I bought a clean 20D because it was only $250. I eventually sold the 40D and kept the 20D, because the ISO noise wasn't as bad as on the 40D. The 20D also didn't seem like a rushed body to compete with Nikon, or something with a lot of bells and whistles to appeal to consumers so Canon could make a quick buck, lol.
About a year ago, I went full-frame and added a 5D to my arsenal. I was very pleased by what it could turn out, and how it handled at high ISOs. Hard times came, though, and I had to sell it. I almost shed a tear as I boxed it up to ship out, haha.
So, after going through those bodies, I think I'd want the 1Ds Mark II for my main body aside from the 20D because of their autofocus abilities, megapixel headroom for cropping, being full-frame for more depth of field control, noise suppression (big pixels are good, haha), and having a weaker AA filter than on a lot of other cameras. I figure there's a reason why the 1Ds Mark II was $8,000 when it came out. But I'm not exactly made of money, so for about $2,000 for that caliber of a camera, I figure buying one would be a steal!
I did consider the 5D Mark II (because of its new technologies), but to me, it seems like way too rushed of a body, like something that's too buggy and won't last forever. I think I'd rather trust tried-and-true bodies, even if they're no longer produced. It boggles me how some people call the 1Ds Mark II obsolete, haha. I probably would even rather have a 1D classic than a 40D, the 1D things like autofocus mean more to me than megapixels. I admit, I wish that the 1Ds Mark II had fun things like lens microadjustment, but they're not important enough of features to pay additional money to buy a current-day body which can be matched in quality by much cheaper bodies from only a few years ago.
I started off with an XTi, then sold that to get a 40D later, mainly because I wanted a better-responding body that would hopefully work better and be more durable for moving-subject photos. At about the same time, I bought a clean 20D because it was only $250. I eventually sold the 40D and kept the 20D, because the ISO noise wasn't as bad as on the 40D. The 20D also didn't seem like a rushed body to compete with Nikon, or something with a lot of bells and whistles to appeal to consumers so Canon could make a quick buck, lol.
About a year ago, I went full-frame and added a 5D to my arsenal. I was very pleased by what it could turn out, and how it handled at high ISOs. Hard times came, though, and I had to sell it. I almost shed a tear as I boxed it up to ship out, haha.
So, after going through those bodies, I think I'd want the 1Ds Mark II for my main body aside from the 20D because of their autofocus abilities, megapixel headroom for cropping, being full-frame for more depth of field control, noise suppression (big pixels are good, haha), and having a weaker AA filter than on a lot of other cameras. I figure there's a reason why the 1Ds Mark II was $8,000 when it came out. But I'm not exactly made of money, so for about $2,000 for that caliber of a camera, I figure buying one would be a steal!
I did consider the 5D Mark II (because of its new technologies), but to me, it seems like way too rushed of a body, like something that's too buggy and won't last forever. I think I'd rather trust tried-and-true bodies, even if they're no longer produced. It boggles me how some people call the 1Ds Mark II obsolete, haha. I probably would even rather have a 1D classic than a 40D, the 1D things like autofocus mean more to me than megapixels. I admit, I wish that the 1Ds Mark II had fun things like lens microadjustment, but they're not important enough of features to pay additional money to buy a current-day body which can be matched in quality by much cheaper bodies from only a few years ago.
So, after going through those bodies, I think I'd want the 1Ds Mark II for my main body aside from the 20D because of their autofocus abilities, megapixel headroom for cropping, being full-frame for more depth of field control, noise suppression (big pixels are good, haha), and having a weaker AA filter than on a lot of other cameras.
And add build quality to that, the robustness of the 1D's is just great! x)
And add build quality to that, the robustness of the 1D's is just great! x)
Aah, ok! So you've tried other cameras as well, very nice. *^^*~ I was curious, for sure. Oddly enough, though, your history sounds quite a bit like mine.
I started back with Canon in the "Good ole' days", shooting AE-1's, A-1's, and an F-1n. Moved on to AF film cameras: a Rebel G, then a EOS-1, and a EOS 1N. Got a bit of gear for the EOS system, so I was kinda locked into the Canon line from the beginning. One of my friends had an old Kodak DCS 560, 6mp 1.3x crop Canon-mount studio camera, which was my first foray into digital cameras.
Afterwards, I ended up buying my own camera since they didn't involve (a) film cost, (b) processing cost, and © waiting for the lab. I started out with a EOS Rebel XT, and kept it for about two years. All in all, it was a great camera, but a bit too small for my hands. Controls were ok, but not quite easy enough to change on the fly. I ended up getting some money due to a car accident (the damage was fixed with no cost to me, so the insurance payment was a freebie).
So, I decided to "upgrade" to a 40D. It fit better in my hands, the controls were -much- easier to maneuver, and, well..it wasn't a "toy" camera like the XT. I didn't really 'need' the upgrade, though...and let the technical "ooh, this one is better because it has.. .. .. .. " get to me, when I should have been focusing on technique and photography itself. Bad decision, I wasn't ready for the upgrade. But, I sold the XT at the same time to get some more glass, so all was good.
Ended up moving out of state to small-town Western PA a year and a half ago, and quickly got wrangled into shooting Weddings, Sports, and Event photography. Mainly because there's only one other "professional" photographer in a 100mile radius. I'd done it before, but this was for cash vs doing it as a hobby.
With weddings, events, and sport photography comes a lot of problems. Especially so with your gear. If your camera breaks down, your batteries die, shorts out...you can't just go "Hey..can we shoot this tomorrow?". So, I quickly realized that I needed a backup body. Now, my room-mate is a photographer as well, shooting a 20D. Great for a backup..but when he needs to shoot as well, not so useful.
I did the same thing as you...checked out different cameras. Went and played around with them, held them, see how they fit, how intuitive the controls were, and compared cost -vs- the features I'd actually use.
My own needs were fairly robust: I needed something with fast, accurate AF (sports and weddings), that performed well in low-light. ISO noise had to be on the mediocre-to-good scale, due to most of my "job" photography going to print. It had to be rugged (which eliminated the XXXD series), and had to be reliable. I already had a crop-factor camera...and I'd wanted to utilize the wide-angle 16-35 f/2.8, and the 24-105 f/4.
The 40D covered sports very well, with the 1.6x crop factor and 7fps. So, speed wasn't essential.
The 1Ds mk II was the same price as the 5D mk II when I bought mine. I wasn't really imressed with the 5d, even though it was cheaper...and my thoughts on the 5DII are "over-complicated". It reminds me of a consumer camera, with a lot of features I didn't care to use.
So....it pretty much came down to the 1D series. The 1 series have the same control layout that my old EOS-1 and 1n have, so it was very familiar and easy to pick up again. They're -large- cameras, which is great with big hands. Its the only series that Canon carries that has water-sealing (with compatible lenses, and the thing is flat-out -rugged-. It FEELS like a tank, and performs like a Ferrari. AF is smooth, fast, crisp, and accurate. Seperate in-camera flash metering is also a plus.
Every function you want to change, as well...is a two-button press. ISO? Two buttons. Want to flip through your photos? Two buttons. AF mode? Two buttons. Shooting mode? You guessed it...two buttons. No more "DSLFJSKit! Why is this set to overexpose by 2 stops?? I didn't set that!" accidental button presses.
There's definitely a reason that it is the "standard" camera for photo journalists. They take a ton of abuse, and just keep on -working-.
DoF control is fantastic. I never really realised how much of a difference FF is over Crop sensors until I shot the first 50 or so shots from the 1 series. Absolutely amazing.
But...now I'm rambling. *^^* I definitely won't say "don't get this camera!", hehe. Quite the opposite, in fact : if you know what you're doing and want a great camera...its hard to beat a 1 series, if you're a Canon shooter.
Hehe. I was just -really- curious if you were an actual photographer, a gear-head, or somebody who wanted a better camera so they "could take better photos". *^^*~
I'm just glad you're the former, rather than the latter!
I started back with Canon in the "Good ole' days", shooting AE-1's, A-1's, and an F-1n. Moved on to AF film cameras: a Rebel G, then a EOS-1, and a EOS 1N. Got a bit of gear for the EOS system, so I was kinda locked into the Canon line from the beginning. One of my friends had an old Kodak DCS 560, 6mp 1.3x crop Canon-mount studio camera, which was my first foray into digital cameras.
Afterwards, I ended up buying my own camera since they didn't involve (a) film cost, (b) processing cost, and © waiting for the lab. I started out with a EOS Rebel XT, and kept it for about two years. All in all, it was a great camera, but a bit too small for my hands. Controls were ok, but not quite easy enough to change on the fly. I ended up getting some money due to a car accident (the damage was fixed with no cost to me, so the insurance payment was a freebie).
So, I decided to "upgrade" to a 40D. It fit better in my hands, the controls were -much- easier to maneuver, and, well..it wasn't a "toy" camera like the XT. I didn't really 'need' the upgrade, though...and let the technical "ooh, this one is better because it has.. .. .. .. " get to me, when I should have been focusing on technique and photography itself. Bad decision, I wasn't ready for the upgrade. But, I sold the XT at the same time to get some more glass, so all was good.
Ended up moving out of state to small-town Western PA a year and a half ago, and quickly got wrangled into shooting Weddings, Sports, and Event photography. Mainly because there's only one other "professional" photographer in a 100mile radius. I'd done it before, but this was for cash vs doing it as a hobby.
With weddings, events, and sport photography comes a lot of problems. Especially so with your gear. If your camera breaks down, your batteries die, shorts out...you can't just go "Hey..can we shoot this tomorrow?". So, I quickly realized that I needed a backup body. Now, my room-mate is a photographer as well, shooting a 20D. Great for a backup..but when he needs to shoot as well, not so useful.
I did the same thing as you...checked out different cameras. Went and played around with them, held them, see how they fit, how intuitive the controls were, and compared cost -vs- the features I'd actually use.
My own needs were fairly robust: I needed something with fast, accurate AF (sports and weddings), that performed well in low-light. ISO noise had to be on the mediocre-to-good scale, due to most of my "job" photography going to print. It had to be rugged (which eliminated the XXXD series), and had to be reliable. I already had a crop-factor camera...and I'd wanted to utilize the wide-angle 16-35 f/2.8, and the 24-105 f/4.
The 40D covered sports very well, with the 1.6x crop factor and 7fps. So, speed wasn't essential.
The 1Ds mk II was the same price as the 5D mk II when I bought mine. I wasn't really imressed with the 5d, even though it was cheaper...and my thoughts on the 5DII are "over-complicated". It reminds me of a consumer camera, with a lot of features I didn't care to use.
So....it pretty much came down to the 1D series. The 1 series have the same control layout that my old EOS-1 and 1n have, so it was very familiar and easy to pick up again. They're -large- cameras, which is great with big hands. Its the only series that Canon carries that has water-sealing (with compatible lenses, and the thing is flat-out -rugged-. It FEELS like a tank, and performs like a Ferrari. AF is smooth, fast, crisp, and accurate. Seperate in-camera flash metering is also a plus.
Every function you want to change, as well...is a two-button press. ISO? Two buttons. Want to flip through your photos? Two buttons. AF mode? Two buttons. Shooting mode? You guessed it...two buttons. No more "DSLFJSKit! Why is this set to overexpose by 2 stops?? I didn't set that!" accidental button presses.
There's definitely a reason that it is the "standard" camera for photo journalists. They take a ton of abuse, and just keep on -working-.
DoF control is fantastic. I never really realised how much of a difference FF is over Crop sensors until I shot the first 50 or so shots from the 1 series. Absolutely amazing.
But...now I'm rambling. *^^* I definitely won't say "don't get this camera!", hehe. Quite the opposite, in fact : if you know what you're doing and want a great camera...its hard to beat a 1 series, if you're a Canon shooter.
Hehe. I was just -really- curious if you were an actual photographer, a gear-head, or somebody who wanted a better camera so they "could take better photos". *^^*~
I'm just glad you're the former, rather than the latter!
Hehe, what a response! Don't worry, though, I read all of it. x)
I'm still a youngin' (20), so I came into this stuff when everyone is saying that film is silly to keep using. I did have an original Olympus Pen half-frame, totally manual camera that I learned to guess correct exposure with (it didn't have any sort of light meter, and I didn't buy one for it, haha), but I have to say, I think I'm pretty much digital now. Well, if someone offered me something cool like a 1V for really cheap, I'd bite, lol.
A lot of people that I've talked to say they don't like the two-hand layout of the older 1D's, but I like that a lot. It might even help you not drop the camera as often, too, hehe. But I've had my fair share of exposure mess-ups because a wheel will turn or something, so I will warmly welcome the two-hand idea when I get my mitts on a Mark II, haha.
About the 5D Mark II again, that's pretty much what I was going at. They're trying to fit way too many nonsensical things into something that isn't even the highest quality in the first place. To me, it's like winning buyers over with megapixels ("Wait, that has 21 MP, it's gotta take good pictures!"), but taken to multiple levels, haha. I hope Canon doesn't keep churning out more and more bodies like that, but that might be the way things'll be for a while, lol.
In regards to seein' my skill level, I'm one of those people who gets a little annoyed to see people with little photography knowledge go out and get a nice camera in hopes of taking better pictures. And not venturing out of Auto mode, even to Av or Tv modes. And never upgrading beyond the 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens that came with a body. And upgrading to a new body instead of to real glass. By all means, I'm no pro yet, but I thought the point of investing in an SLR was to unleash your creative abilities, not let the camera do all the thinking for you, and thoughts along those lines. Oh well, as long as you like what your camera does by itself, I shouldn't be sayin' too much. But still. x)
I'd like to think that I'd be a good owner for a 1Ds Mark II, I have the basics down, and have the glass that will shine on it (they're in my profile, lol). And I've been without a real camera for way too long now, haha.
I'm still a youngin' (20), so I came into this stuff when everyone is saying that film is silly to keep using. I did have an original Olympus Pen half-frame, totally manual camera that I learned to guess correct exposure with (it didn't have any sort of light meter, and I didn't buy one for it, haha), but I have to say, I think I'm pretty much digital now. Well, if someone offered me something cool like a 1V for really cheap, I'd bite, lol.
A lot of people that I've talked to say they don't like the two-hand layout of the older 1D's, but I like that a lot. It might even help you not drop the camera as often, too, hehe. But I've had my fair share of exposure mess-ups because a wheel will turn or something, so I will warmly welcome the two-hand idea when I get my mitts on a Mark II, haha.
About the 5D Mark II again, that's pretty much what I was going at. They're trying to fit way too many nonsensical things into something that isn't even the highest quality in the first place. To me, it's like winning buyers over with megapixels ("Wait, that has 21 MP, it's gotta take good pictures!"), but taken to multiple levels, haha. I hope Canon doesn't keep churning out more and more bodies like that, but that might be the way things'll be for a while, lol.
In regards to seein' my skill level, I'm one of those people who gets a little annoyed to see people with little photography knowledge go out and get a nice camera in hopes of taking better pictures. And not venturing out of Auto mode, even to Av or Tv modes. And never upgrading beyond the 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens that came with a body. And upgrading to a new body instead of to real glass. By all means, I'm no pro yet, but I thought the point of investing in an SLR was to unleash your creative abilities, not let the camera do all the thinking for you, and thoughts along those lines. Oh well, as long as you like what your camera does by itself, I shouldn't be sayin' too much. But still. x)
I'd like to think that I'd be a good owner for a 1Ds Mark II, I have the basics down, and have the glass that will shine on it (they're in my profile, lol). And I've been without a real camera for way too long now, haha.
*eardroops* Sorry, I do ramble. Especially when it comes to cameras, gear, and techniques.
Hee. Its good to hear those views about photography, honestly. A lot of photographers get caught up in the rat race of "ooh, look, a new camera! It has 8 more megapixels, and Live View, and does video, and..and....OOH, I need to upgrade! My camera is obsolete now, and completely useless because it doesn't do... "
*^^* I'm of the view of "Get out and shoot. Don't worry about what you don't have, and what you can't do. Work with what you've got, and push it to the max". That's the secret to photography, honestly. Making yourself better as a photographer is the goal, not getting the latest gear.
That being said, I get a lot of negative looks when I say that. I've had people bark back at me and say "That's easy for YOU to say. You're shooting a 1Ds II, with L glass, and...and.." And...I grab their camera, frame up a shot, and take a photo. And usually end up with them more pissed at me after wards, hehehe. But that's half the fun.
Yeah, I shoot off of some pretty sweet gear, most of it rather specialized for the shots I want to take. And, yeah..its top of the line (mainly because I don't like replacing gear). But...its a tool. The only thing that the more expensive gear gets you is a bit more ease of use, convenience, and ruggedness.
Personally, once I stopped worrying about what I didn't have, stopped lusting over the latest and the greatest gear...and started working on photography itself...I was a lot happier. And I improved...and realized, the gear? Its just a tool. A tool that's only as good as the craftsman.
*^^* Best of luck with your gear, hon. Buy the best you can -afford-, and go from there. Definitely look forward to seeing what you come up with when you get your baby back!
Hee. Its good to hear those views about photography, honestly. A lot of photographers get caught up in the rat race of "ooh, look, a new camera! It has 8 more megapixels, and Live View, and does video, and..and....OOH, I need to upgrade! My camera is obsolete now, and completely useless because it doesn't do... "
*^^* I'm of the view of "Get out and shoot. Don't worry about what you don't have, and what you can't do. Work with what you've got, and push it to the max". That's the secret to photography, honestly. Making yourself better as a photographer is the goal, not getting the latest gear.
That being said, I get a lot of negative looks when I say that. I've had people bark back at me and say "That's easy for YOU to say. You're shooting a 1Ds II, with L glass, and...and.." And...I grab their camera, frame up a shot, and take a photo. And usually end up with them more pissed at me after wards, hehehe. But that's half the fun.
Yeah, I shoot off of some pretty sweet gear, most of it rather specialized for the shots I want to take. And, yeah..its top of the line (mainly because I don't like replacing gear). But...its a tool. The only thing that the more expensive gear gets you is a bit more ease of use, convenience, and ruggedness.
Personally, once I stopped worrying about what I didn't have, stopped lusting over the latest and the greatest gear...and started working on photography itself...I was a lot happier. And I improved...and realized, the gear? Its just a tool. A tool that's only as good as the craftsman.
*^^* Best of luck with your gear, hon. Buy the best you can -afford-, and go from there. Definitely look forward to seeing what you come up with when you get your baby back!
Comments