Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 30, 2004, 7:16 AM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 14

Am newly retired and plan on traveling via motorhome taking photos of wildlife and nature and probably will want to make 20x24, 24x30 or 30x40 prints to sell at art shows etc. Now have 1D, D60, L lenses and have a 1D Mark II on order. Am wondering if I should get the 1Ds instead and why? Any comments would be welcome.


videocastle is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 30, 2004, 10:47 AM   #2
Senior Member
PeterP's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,396

I think only your usage can answer that question

The 1D-MKII is a fast operating camera able to wail off long, fast bursts, at 8.3 mp.
The 1ds, is not so fast but gets you an additional 3mp if you really need it.

I suspect they will both eat storage like crazey.

Are you going to try to take a large format printer along with you in the motorhome?
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2004, 12:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803

I agree with PeterP (again!)

It's all about what you do. For "wildlife" that makes me think 1D-Mark II. It has got that fast frames per second and deep buffer for action shots.

But then you say "nature". What does "nature" mean to you? Landscape? Macro of bugs? Please define that. If it's landscapes, then the 1Ds is a bit better of a choise. The full-frame-ness will mean wide angle is easier to get (but 1.3x crop of the 1D-Mark II isn't that bad.) It's higher resolution will help with the larger prints and detail capture. But macro of bugs... I don't think it matters either way.

eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2004, 10:29 PM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 189

If I was going to *SELL* 30 by 40 inch prints at art shows, I would opt for the 1Ds.

-jb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2004, 8:39 AM   #5
Senior Member
PeterP's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,396

Personally hitting that 30*40 size I'd be more inclined to use medium format bodies and 16 to 22mp backs, if you expect to produce professional quality results for resale.

If you work out the paper realestate that 30*40 is a huge jump up.

08*10 - 80 square inches
11*16 - 176 square inches
13*19 - 247 square inches
16*20 - 320 square inches
20*24 - 480 square inches
24*30 - 720 square inches
30*40 - 1200 square inches

But that is only IMHO I've never seen output that big from a small format camera. Maybe it can be done.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2004, 9:33 AM   #6
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default 30x40 prints from digital

If one is hell bent on making LARGE pictures from a purely digital camera; may I suggest the software plug-in for PhotoShop, Genuine Fractals? I love the way it works, however, I have not enlarged as big as you will.
csnudelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2004, 6:06 PM   #7
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 123

Just curious as to what printer or printing service you plan to use.
twcoffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2004, 7:12 PM   #8
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139

Wildlife & Landscape photos are a bit different animals. In general, to print huge landscapes you either want all the resolution you can afford, or you want to take overlapping multiple images and stitch.

If wildlife is going to be a major part of your photography, the 1D Mark II is the better instrument for a couple reasons.

1. The 8 megapixel resolution coupled with the 1.3x crop factor (reduced field of view) will get you 30 percent closer images with any of your lenses than the full frame 1DS. People always like to make the argument that the additional resolution will allow you to crop and make up the difference, but in this case it doesn't. When you crop the 11 megapixel image to reach the 30 percent greater focal length you have fewer pixels defining the subject than with the 8 megapixel Mark II.

2. You absolutely will need the 8+ frames per second burst if you expect to maximize the opportunities for those "special" frames when shooting wildlife. My 1DS stays home when I shoot wildlife and my 1D and 10D take its place. The 10D for the 1.6x plus better high ISO performance when critters are standing still and the 1D for the burst capabilities. I've tried my 1DS on many, many occasions and found it wanting for wildlife.

Some will say that the focal length differential between crop factor and full frame camera can be made up with more glass. True, but it's still relative. An 800 mm lens on the 1DS is 800mm. On the 1D Mark II it's 1040mm equivalency. Add the 1.4x tele converter and you have significant focal length for serious wildlife photos.

Now, what works "for" you for wildlife works against you in general for landscapes, but there are issues where super wide is difficult to do with my 1DS unless you want to purchase a really expensive Zeiss prime. Most of the Sigma and Canon wide angle lenses coupled with the 1DS at full wide angle are problematic from either chromatic aberration or vignetting or simply the normal perspective distortions which must be corrected in software. Personally, to go wider than about 24mm I much prefer to stitch even my 1DS images.

As for printing large - for wildlife which nearly fills the frame, it's quite possible with 8 megapixel resolution to get quite nice 16x24's and even larger. For detailed landscapes either plan on stitching or use the 1DS or a MF digital back or film.

Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:01 PM.