Given a choice of a Christmas Gift. Would you pick a very good quality 1D mark iv or 7d ii.?
Given a choice of a Christmas Gift. Would you pick a very good quality ( 9/10) 1D mark iv or 7d ii.? So essentially its cost aside. and why would you pick one over the other,?
Mark IV for rugged durability and better ISO than the new 7DII, (I own both cameras) and at least for me, that shoot in dark environments the Mark IV proves to do a better job. If you live in a place with good light then there should be no prob picking the 7DII.
Given a choice of a Christmas Gift. Would you pick a very good quality 1D mar...
I prefer the files from Canons 1D cameras that's why I choose a 1D3 over the original 7D the last time I was in the market for an action body. With that said I have not yet process or shot with the 7D2. The fact that canon has virtually eliminated the shadow banding issues with the 7D2 is a plus over the mark IV and from I have read it has a better focusing system then the mark IV so the choice is harder between these two cameras. I guess it depends on what's more important better AF or cleaner high ISO files
I have a very good 1D mark iv that I could easily sell and get a 7dii but I am not sure. Having said that I haven't been able to get the fullest out of the 1D, but I have gotten enough great shots out of it to have me interested.
I have a 1D Mark IV (which I bought used in excellent/almost new condition), and the original 7D, which I carry at the same time as the Mark IV with (usually) a 70-200 f/4L IS for quick flight shots and sometimes as a backup to the Mark IV depending on the shooting situation. I might eventually replace the 7D with the 7DII, but I would not replace the Mark IV with the new 7DII right now. One major reason is that this is a new model, with some potential bugs. Of course, these might eventually be fixed in firmware.
Here is an action shot I got with the Mark IV last February. It was extremely dark on the lake, and I was using my 500 f/4L IS with the 2x TC II. It was so dark I had to rely on the autofocus, which did amazingly well under the circumstances. Note the point of focus is on the rear bird, but the camera did nail the focus on that bird, even though they were moving very rapidly. i don't know whether the 7D II could do this as well, but my guess is it would not. A necessary qualification: This is only an an opinion based on incomplete data since I have not yet owned and extensively tested a 7D II.
Lovely shot Dennis, but I don't know why you say the 7D2 couldn't do that well. I see nothing problematic other than getting the focus where you want it. To get both birds' eyes in focus, you'll need a smaller aperture on either camera. You still got a great shot.
I wouldn't buy a 7D2 right now as the AF performed poorly in my hands. I would wait a few more months to see what happens, maybe a firmware upgrade, product advisory (recall) may be in order. If this is the AF performance one would expect from the 7D2 it doesn't hold a candle to the 1D4 which def. had a proven solid AF for flight.
As I'm in the same quandary (7DII vs. 1D IV), Arash, considering your comments here and on your site, has anything happened so far to change your mind ? or would you still pick the 1D IV ? Intend to use with the 400 5.6 + extender(s) - 1.4x for sure and maybe the 2x if AF still good.
I have been using the 1D4 for a few years now, and am very happy with its performance using the 400L F5.6 with and without a 1.4 teleconverter. The AF is of course not as fast with the TC but still acceptable. I haven't used it with the 2.0 although I use one often with my 500. Just make sure that you stop down a stop when using the 2x. It's possible with the new firmware that they have fixed the AF problems with the 7D2 by now and I'm certain someone will chime in on that matter.
As I'm in the same quandary (7DII vs. 1D IV), Arash, considering your comments here and on your site, has anything happened so far to change your mind ? or would you still pick the 1D IV ? Intend to use with the 400 5.6 + extender(s) - 1.4x for sure and maybe the 2x if AF still good.
All/any helpful comments welcome.
Stan
If it's any help, I had the same dilemma and notched the following pros and cons:
1DIV: more powerful battery set to drive larger lenses = more reliable AF for focus tracking BIF, more ruged build, proven abilities, better lowlight performance in other situations
7D2: probably (?) a higher grade AF as a system, lighter, smaller, new body = full warranty
Everything I have read suggests that the higher pixel count of the 7D2 offsets the better pixel performance of the 1DIV so for me the drivers lay elsewhere and I went for the 7D and now the 7D2, but that ole buyer's remorse still kicks in occasionally.
As I'm in the same quandary (7DII vs. 1D IV), Arash, considering your comments here and on your site, has anything happened so far to change your mind ? or would you still pick the 1D IV ? Intend to use with the 400 5.6 + extender(s) - 1.4x for sure and maybe the 2x if AF still good.
All/any helpful comments welcome.
Stan
I just tried a loaner 7D2 that Canon CPS provided me. Unfortunately I don't have any positive update to add to what I said before. I tried the camera at location photographing black-necked stilts and the results were quite disappointing. I was not expecting 1DX performance but at least descent keeper ratio which I didn't get. I had great results with the 1D4 at the same location so for me that camera remains a proven choice.
I don't know if the loaner body had the latest firmware or not, I already sent it back to Canon. Doug seems to be happy with his third copy of this camera (the first two he tried were bad) so your experience may vary as well. If you do plan to purchase one, make sure you can return it for a full refund if it doesn't perform, or you may be stuck with a camera that nobody will want.
Having said that, I would also avoid using a 400 f/5.6 with an extender for BIF, it will be slow, soft and frustrating most of the time, with any camera.
hope this helps
Last edited by arash_hazeghi; 05-18-2015 at 04:49 PM.
Months ago I had the same dilemma. I originally purchased a 7D2 and was not happy with its performance with regard to both image quality and autofocus. I had been using a 70D and 1DIII before it and my goal was always to get a 1D Mark IV but when the 7D2 was released I decided to try it with all of the positive hype. But like I said I was never impressed with the 7D2, and even after trying two brand new ones, I returned them and decided to go for a nice used 1D Mark IV. Previously I loved my 1DIII over my 70D so I was hoping I would feel the same with the 1DIV over the 7D2.
Sure enough I bought a 1D Mark IV from EBay with only 9000+ shutter actuations for $1900. It was in excellent condition. As soon as I used it I immediately noticed improved performance over the 7D2. Everything from the character of the noise, autofocus performance, colors and handling made me feel like I made the right decision. I used a new 100-400II with both cameras so the lens stayed the same.
Quite frankly, the 7D2 felt and in some ways, with the exception of video performance, felt like a toy in comparison to the 1D Mark IV. So if you can find a nice 1DIV for around $2000 I would get it if you're willing to deal with the extra weight and lack of warranty.
Hi,
I am on my way for a used 1d4 for my 500mm f4 IS. Some block my way arguing that 1d4 is a 5year old body and 7d2 is new and it has improved technology and will last long. My only concern is the better IQ for fast moving subjects. Could anyone help me to make my way clear.
It's entirely your decision at the end of the day Kamal.
From the way I see it unless you know how to apply the correct techniques to take sharp images of stationary or flying birds, then camera bodies will be irrelevant irrespective of how well they handle noise, AF or the number of megapixels or how many people are buying them because they are the newest thing on the market. Just because a camera is older, does not make it obsolete.
For me, I'd never ever again buy a camera with an APS-C sensor at all. I love the feel of the 1D bodies on my 500/4L IS USM MkI. I still mostly shoot with a 1DMkIII (or sometimes a 1DMkIIn) and have no issues getting sharp images at all. It must be the obsolete camera I suppose. That's my point. :) Hope they don't make certain camera bodies a pre-requisite to participate in online forums anytime soon.
It's entirely your decision at the end of the day Kamal.
From the way I see it unless you know how to apply the correct techniques to take sharp images of stationary or flying birds, then camera bodies will be irrelevant irrespective of how well they handle noise, AF or the number of megapixels or how many people are buying them because they are the newest thing on the market. Just because a camera is older, does not make it obsolete.
For me, I'd never ever again buy a camera with an APS-C sensor at all. I love the feel of the 1D bodies on my 500/4L IS USM MkI. I still mostly shoot with a 1DMkIII (or sometimes a 1DMkIIn) and have no issues getting sharp images at all. It must be the obsolete camera I suppose. That's my point. :) Hope they don't make certain camera bodies a pre-requisite to participate in online forums anytime soon.
Good luck mate.
Thanks Akos.Yes I admit your words . Even with my current t2i I sometimes were able to make sharp images , though they are portraits. But what about the duarabilty?
Well finally managed to get a well-used 1D mark IV, a bit long in the tooth with 150k actuations but well within my budget. Works well. Now I'm on the hedge for the firrst BIF Lens:
1) Old 100-400 - the local Canon shop has only this as rental (no rental 100-400 II or 400 f/5.6 in the shop), not really happy even after microadjustment.
2) New 100-400 - with 1.4 or 2.0x TC - stretching my limits - from the internet I see that people are happy using it with the 1.4 II and III - but I will have to choose either the 1.4 or 2.0 can't afford both in this scenario.
3) 400 f/5.6 - Arash warned against this with a TC, so no go I guess.
4) Tamron 150-600 - but a bit mixed reviews on the internet.
- a Canon 500 is out of my budget - even used - it's around $4500 for a used one over here.
I have the original 100-400 and reading several reviews the MkII appeals for reasons not related to image quality: it autofocuses quicker when used with a teleconverter, it has 4 stops IS and has a closer minimum focus distance. And I would go for the 1.4tc because I don't think you will have AF with the 2x (f11 effective aperture). Again for various comments the MkIII shows its mettle with the lonr MkII primes - I have just got a secondhand MkII 1.4tc and it seems fine with my 100-400.
The Tamron seems OK ot me but I am not sure I would appreciate the extra bulk.
Given a choice of a Christmas Gift. Would you pick a very good quality 1D mark iv or 7d ii.?
nick clayton thanked for this post
Originally Posted by Stan Bax
Reply With Quote
