Original 1D - Still a good buy?

[John Clare]

Hi all.

I have the opportunity to trade in a 30D with a used original 1D for a good price. This will be a second camera for action/foul weather/press work. My other camera is a 5D for when I need low light performace, high res, and wide-angle ability.

Am I mad, or shall I keep the 30D? I realise the battery life/screen/out-of-camera JPG quality will be better on the 30D but I've realised I need a fast/tough camera for some types of work.

I know the Mark III is on the horizon (and I used to have Mk IIs!) but the original 1D is still a capable perfomer, no?

I reckon the 5D and 1D will make a good combo!

Cheers,

John

[ChristopherButler]

Hi John - Yes the 1D is still a very capable camera. I still have mine as a backup. When I switched from the 1D to the 1Dm2 several years ago, I found the image quality a bit better, but not so much as I would have expected form the jump from 4 to 8 mp. I still have many, many sellable images taken with the 1D.

The significant gap between the 1D and the 1Dm2, in my mind, is on two fronts: Battery Life and flash sync speed. The battery life issue is overcome with lots of extra batteries: with the 1D, I was seeing 400-600 shots. With the 1Dm2, I would see upwards of 4000 (First time that happened, I was absolutely stunned). The 1D has the edge over the 1Dm2 with 1/500 flash sync, which is very useful for fill flash in sports photography.

I don't recall a huge performance difference in the buffers, although the 1Dm2 wrote to CF faster, it also wrote larger files. I *think* you'll need to use 2 Mb or smaller cards on the 1D. Check on that.

I'm sure there are folks who will have comments on sensor noise, CMOS vs CCD image quality, etc. The images have a different "look" to them. The archives will have lots of good info for you to search on.

I think a 1D at a good price point would be an absolutely terrific bargain.

[Terry Zorich]

Originally Posted by ChristopherButler

Hi John - Yes the 1D is still a very capable camera...

...The significant gap between the 1D and the 1Dm2, in my mind, is on two fronts: Battery Life and flash sync speed. The battery life issue is overcome with lots of extra batteries: with the 1D, I was seeing 400-600 shots. With the 1Dm2, I would see upwards of 4000 (First time that happened, I was absolutely stunned). The 1D has the edge over the 1Dm2 with 1/500 flash sync, which is very useful for fill flash in sports photography....

...I *think* you'll need to use 2 Mb or smaller cards on the 1D...

...I think a 1D at a good price point would be an absolutely terrific bargain.

First off...minor thing: I think you meant 2 Gb cards, not 2 Mb.

I still have my 1D. I'd probably trade it for a 30D.

I agree - the battery life was a bit of an issue, any yes - simply having extra batteries cures that (at ~$30 each, that's not too tough).

I believe you can use faster sync speeds with a 550 or 580 EX, no?

My only other real beef with the original 1D was the LCD screen; compared to the more recent versions, the 1D's screen is comparatively dim.

All that said, the 1D makes excellent images and a used one at a good price would be nice for someone who needs a camera for the occasional action stuff. If you're going to shoot a LOT of action, get a 1DM2 or newer...

[michaelnotar]

the origional model had a CCD sensor...?

[ChristopherButler]

Originally Posted by Terry Zorich

First off...minor thing: I think you meant 2 Gb cards, not 2 Mb. ...

Yup. Oops. 2 Gb. Dang - And I'm usually so careful about such things.

Originally Posted by Terry Zorich

I believe you can use faster sync speeds with a 550 or 580 EX, no?

That's a yesbut. High Speed Sync is very limited in range. I could throw 50' with a 580 on a 1D and add catchlights and subtle fill. Nice.

I agree with the rest of your comments. As a tough backup sport/bad weather/high frame rate camera it's still very capable, though, which is what I think the question was.

[dankapsner]

The 1D is probably the best camera I have ever owned in terms of value for money. I bought mine a few years ago used for 2 grand. It does a great job in low light up to ISO 800, is FAST, and has never failed to function when I needed it to. It's not too hot for TTL flash, but with a reliable auto flash it's quite good. (Of course I have to think more, but that's good for me!) The LCD screen on the back is lousy, but I can make out a histogram and that's what I really need it for. It will tolerate foul weather far better than the smaller Canon cousins, too. I used 10D bodies for backup and low light and have now migrated to the 20D for low light. I use the 20Ds more than the 10Ds, and more than the 1D, because they're more responsive than the 10D and MUCH lighter than the 1D. As much as I would like to rely on one kind of body (which has exactly the same controls and uses the same type of batteries and same crop factor), I don't think I can give up the 1D--it's been too reliable and it's become sort of an old friend. So yes, it's still a very capable camera, and if you find one in good condition it's an excellent value. Having said all that, I don't know if changing from a 30D to a 1D is a good idea, but the 1D remains a very capable tool and the file size isn't really an issue for me.

[DonLashier]

I bought my 1D in 6 years ago shortly after it first came out and still haven't upgraded although the MkIII has me thinking about it finally. It is fine for up to 12x18 or even larger for some purposes. The only reason it's even crossed my mind to upgrade is relatively poor high ISO performance compared to the later CMOS versions. A plus is high speed flash sync which the newer models lack. Originally I thought the 1.3x was a compromise (no FF at the time), but now I'm quite happy with this and I shoot primarily WA and UWA. Another big plus in my mind is the small raw files (~4MB) which really eases storage and archiving.

- DL