Hey Cannon folks,

My current wedding setup is a 5d and 40d, with 24L, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, and 135L. But i have 2 problems that are bugging me at the moment, slow AF on the 5d, and the 1.6x crop on the 40d. I find the 5d really can be slow to AF when the subjects are moving, like isle shots, or dance shots. And the difference between 1.0 and 1.6 is just annoying me recently. I have fallen back in love with the view of a full frame body, and how lenses look on full frame.

So the question is, will i be happy with 1.3x, i figure it's much closer to full frame, without the expense of a 1ds series body. But which recent 1d body do i pick? How is the 1dmk2n for weddings? Does it handle high ISO well, say 1000-1600? Is the 1dmk3 that much better, and if it is, why is it better?

I was thinking 5dmk2, but it doesn't seem like the auto focus has really been improved much. And i really don't want to wait another 2 months.

Thanks for any advise

I am in the same boat as I am currently using 2 5d's to shoot weddings with, and I am finding that I am having serious issues nailing the focus with the 5d because it is really slow. I used to shoot with a 1ds mark II and never remember having such slow focus problems and it was pretty fast and accurate. I have been seriously considering purchasing a 1d mark II N but didn't know how well it handled ISO 1600 as I shoot that a lot during dark receptions.

I shoot with 2 bodies at all times and my ideal set up would be a full frame body to shoot wide angle, and a 1.3x body to put my 70-200 IS lens on for just a little extra reach. I am sure someone that shoots with a 1d mark II N will chime in soon with an answer to the auto focus speed and accuracy as well as the ISO performance.

I know Trevor Meeks used to shoot with the 1d mark II N, Trevor?

I forgot to mention that I also owned the 1d mark III shortly after it came out and before they came out with the blue and yellow dot auto focus fixes, so it left a bad taste in my mouth and I am still leary about owning another one even with the yellow dot fix. I hear the 1d mark II N focus outdoes the 1d mark III a million times.

I shoot with a 1D Mk IIn and it is a great camera. Super fast and built like a tank. It handles high ISO pretty well (probably not as clean as a 5D), but my biggest issue with it is that the AF does not react as well in low light. It works, but it's just not as responsive as it should be. I spoke with a Canon rep on Saturday. He agreed that the IIn wasn't quite there in low light AF. He assured me that the early AF problems with the Mk III have been resolved, but personally, I'll hold out for the next upgrade. The rep also said that Canon decided to leave the AF system alone in the 5D Mk II. He said that Canon wanted to get the camera out quickly, and it would have taken another 6-8 months to upgrade the AF system for that camera. So, if you're not happy with the 5D's focusing right now, it's not going to be any better on the new model.
By the way, I really like the 1.3 crop factor. It's just enough to eliminate vignetting on wide angle lenses, but not too much to lose the nice wide perspectives.

Thanks for the reply Would you be willing to share some ISO 1600 shots from some weddings/receptions so we could compare to the 5d? I don't mind a little added noise on an in focus 1d mark II N shot, versus a low noise out of focus 5d shot, lol.

I've owned all the camera's you speak of and I'm a geek, so I'll chime in.

The MkIIn outfocuses the MkIII with long glass, 300mm+, in a field sports situation (outdoors, lots of light). That's it. For everything else the MkIII is superior. It's much better in low light, that's for sure. The Micro Adjust in the MkIII is worth it's weight in gold if you shoot with fast primes and want to nail your focus - it lets you dial in the focus point for each of your lenses.

The high ISO ability of the MkIIn is way behind either of your current cameras, you'll be dissapointed with it. On the other hand the MkIII is a stop (yes, a full stop) better than the 5D, that blew me away. The downside is the image quality (crispness and color) aren't quite as good as the 5D.

Plus if you're used to the controls on the 5D/40D then you'll like the MkIII - the MkIIn will drive you crazy (it did me anyway, Trevor will disagree about which is better)

Here in rainy WA I really couldn't do my job without a sealed body, I'm excited they're adding seals to the next 5D. If I only had 5Ds and no MkIII we would have had to call off yesterday's senior shoot - that would have cost me time and money and the chance for some great images in the rain.



To bad they didn't follow Nikon's example and just put the good focus system from the pro body in there.

Bill, thanks for your insight Did you have your mk III sent in for the autofocus fix and does it focus well and fast in low light? Could you elaborate on the Micro adjust? I have never heard of it and have no clue how that works? Set auto focus points for each lens??? I am confused

LOL - I smashed my MkIII on the asphalt at a job this summer and Canon had to replace the whole mirror box assembly to fix it (along with most of the exterior shell and the LCD), so ya, I've got the new sub-mirror. ;-)

The micro adjust lets you adjust for front or back focus with each lens you use. I use graph paper to check the focus accuracy of each lens wide open and adjust if needed. changes in altitude and/or temperature can affect focus accuracy, this lets you adjust for it.

Read about it here: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article...adjustment.html

Thanks for all the food for thought. Sounds like i probably should lean towards a 1dmk3 to get everything i want.

Now do i find a referb or just grab a used one? These things are built like a tank right?

Yes the MIII is built well. I love mine. I love the weather seal, can't say enough about that. And if you ever want to randomly go shoot sports... let me just say oe thing..... TEN FRAMES PER SECOND! Ya aint missing nothin'!

And by the way, the focus issues that were so well advertised early on have never once been an issue on my MIII. I should say about full frame, I've only ever used Mark series cameras because my name is Mark, just kidding, so I don't know the difference of using a full frame camera. As well, I've never had anyone prove to me the incredible difference in having one and my customers as well have ever known the difference. The pros far out way the cons, considering I don't know of any cons. Oh and I think it's lighter than the Mark II.

Refurb or used? Good question.

As for high ISO noise, I'm perfectly happy with the 1D Mk IIn up through ISO 1000 and I think it performs better than the 5D and 40D. When you hit ISO 1600, they appear somewhat similar. Beyond that, the 5D has a clear advantage.

If you are interested I am selling a 1DMKII :-)

At no ISO is the IQ of the either the 1D MkII or MkIII on par with the 5D. But I agree the MkII is pretty clean up to 800 or 1000 (and downright ugly after that), the MkIII is pretty clean up to 2500.




LOL - it is a great camera - fast and solid.

I jumped on a 1dmk3 over on FM. I learned the controls of the mk3 are closer to the 5d's that i am used to working. And the mk3 sounds like the best fit for a wedding photographer that likes natural light, or to be close to it in dark areas.

Thanks for all the help everyone, you guys really helped me see the differences between the cameras.

Just thought i would update this post. As i had said i bought a 1dmk3, and it's probably the best investment i have made all year in gear. The auto focus is just amazing compared to a 5d or 40d. It focuses with basically no light around, and i really pushed it at an outdoor night wedding reception, and the focus is dead on, and the exposures are great. Plus the crop factor isn't as bad as the 40d, so my lenses still feel close to how they feel on the 5d.

So i can't really compare it to the 1dmk2n, but the mk3 is amazing. And i felt so much better knowing that i had 2 copies of every image from that camera right as i clicked the shutter. So cool.

Well..I have both cameras, I also have a 5D and an old Canon rangefinder, and I use them all. "Which one is better for weddings" ...
Well up until a few years ago Jeff Ascough shot on Leicas, film...slow ISO...and look at his work back then...amazing.
I think too many people are caught up in the gadgetry and not focused on getting 80 good shots.
Focus on the art and composition and the important stuff..not on gadgets.
With that said, why bother with Canon, just get that new Leica...