Canon EOS 1DMKII

As I said elsewhere on this site , I didn't expect to own the 1DMKII so fast but considering the opportunity I was offered to buy one at

an unbeatable price and immediately , I jumped in . My first impressions , so far , are that the image quality isn't that superior to those I got from my 10D . I'll probably will need to enlarge above 13x19 to notice a difference . That's without any shots at high ISO. But , what does make the difference is the speed and crisp functionning of the camera , very comparable to my 1D . I'll need to do more testing before coming up with conclusions and find a good subject to judge about the consistency but , already , I can say it's a beast of a camera . In fact , the best I owned so far . Digitally speaking , of course ... 

Update : This camera is AWESOME ! It's a pure joy to use . Pics straight out of the camera ( RAW ) do convert nicely in EFV and DPP without much doctoring in PS . The extended dynamic range compared to my 10D's is really worth the upgrade as well as the overall much more precise working of the functions .  But , compared to my 1D , the files need more post processing to produce ..... even better results . Try one if you can and you will be sold . As I was . Its ability to cope with high ISO settings is of unknown quality in the Canon DSLR  range so far . The price to acquire this wonder is insane , at least to amateur photographers but , then , the original price of the Classic 1D was even higher . Not to mention how much you'd need to cash down for a 1Ds . Just can't believe I managed to get this incredible camera . I love it !

 

First pics were taken at ISO200 with 50mm 1.8 Ser I and 17-40mm 4 L .

RAW converted with EVU , all settings on standard except Sharpness +2 . RGB .

Further Sharpness increase where necessary with Focal Blade . resized ans quality set to 60% .

 

IMG_00802_RT16.jpg (189790 octets)

IMG_00905_RT8.jpg (212874 octets)

IMG_00815_RT16.jpg (100850 octets)

IMG_00907_RT8.jpg (191526 octets)

IMG_00904_RT8.jpg (188658 octets)
IMG_00914_RT8.jpg (183681 octets) IMG_00810_RT16.jpg (142660 octets)

IMG_00909_RT8.jpg (289440 octets)

IMG_00900_RT8.jpg (224201 octets) IMG_00911_RT8.jpg (181713 octets)
IMG_00938_RT8.jpg (159011 octets) IMG_00957_RT8.jpg (120439 octets)

IMG_00976_RT8.jpg (194261 octets)

IMG_00958dd_RT8.jpg (128998 octets) IMG_00960dd_RT8.jpg (97518 octets)
IMG_00972_RT8.jpg (130924 octets) IMG_00969_RT8.jpg (206148 octets) IMG_00974_RT8.jpg (205681 octets) IMG_00978_RT8.jpg (149650 octets) IMG_00973_RT8.jpg (126453 octets)

ISO400 - EF 80-200 2.8 L

RAW , ISO400 , TV , 1/250 , AWB , converted with EOS File Viewer ( EFV )

Tired of getting 00 errors and not so sharp pics with my 70-200 2.8 L IS , I sold it after one month of use and reacquired a good copy of the 80-200 2.8 L I liked so much . Again , I'm not disapointed with the image quality ! Why didn't they make it with the IS .........?

IMG_01036_RT8.jpg (149893 octets) IMG_01040_RT8.jpg (127444 octets)

IMG_01042_RT8.jpg (136515 octets)

IMG_01043_RT8.jpg (207367 octets) IMG_01045_RT8.jpg (163709 octets)
IMG_01295_RT8.jpg (77955 octets) IMG_01299_RT8.jpg (95816 octets)

IMG_01297_RT8.jpg (81712 octets)

IMG_01300_RT8.jpg (79826 octets) IMG_01304_RT8.jpg (155076 octets)

Same settings but Raw files converted with Digital Photo Professional ( DPP )

DPP_0018.jpg (134715 octets) DPP_0003.jpg (349698 octets) DPP_0023.jpg (392291 octets) DPP_0002.jpg (332255 octets) DPP_0020.jpg (107977 octets)
DPP_0016.jpg (110518 octets)

DPP_0001.jpg (331484 octets)

DPP_0013.jpg (132550 octets)

DPP_0004.jpg (332990 octets)

DPP_0014.jpg (160418 octets)
DPP_0009.jpg (394495 octets)

DPP_0017.jpg (332880 octets)

DPP_0019.jpg (112116 octets)

DPP_0022.jpg (387255 octets)

DPP_0006.jpg (313877 octets)
    DPP_0015.jpg (135308 octets)