Focus in 1Ds vs 5D: is it worth the extra $$?

[Tim Adams]

I bought my 5d -- my first Canon -- about a year ago. I don't need the blazingly quick autofocus of a sports photographer, but do quite a bit of photojournalism-type shooting, and here I've found the 5D lacking.

First, it just doesn't lock focus in low light as well as my old Nikon F100. On several occasions -- several occasions that I can't forget, that still haunt me -- I've had a "keeper" in the viewfinder, pressed the shutter, and then stood there in agony as the 5D refused to grab a focus point and the scene shifted.

Second, I've got nine focus points in the viewfinder and badly want more. I especially want them near the edges of the frame, but perhaps I can't get them -- my brief twiddling with a 1Ds in the store showed more focus points, but all in the wide diamond in frame center.

(Yes, I can lock focus and recompose, but it's not the same, not the same ... )

I prefer to keep full frame -- I'm spoiled <g> -- and don't think I need ID focus speed. I could rent a 1Ds for comparison, but thought I'd ask here first:

Given my complaints, would I be likely to find a 1Ds much superior?

(BTW, for Canon lovers: please don't get me wrong. There's much to like about the 5D, too.)

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Tim,

That frustration is terrible, you have the perfect shot and nothing happens.

The 5D is not a Pro camera in the sense that the 1DSII is.

Now please no one get mad at me as before when guys were insulted that their favorite camera (and mine) is not relegated to the same league as the 1D series!

Blame Canon! They gave the 5D a better sensor, IMHO, with wonderful color, yet made it with a somewhat sluggish autofocus decision chain!

Still it is the best camera I have ever owned! I love it and would not part with it.

I have heard from a game shooter back from Africa that the 5D could not replace the 1DII or the 1DsII for action shots. One does not have the luxury of getting the Hyena to back off so you canc see her challenging the lioness for her kill once more.

I myself love the 5D and hardly use the 1DII for street and a lot of event work. However, when I'm serious, the 1D series has to do the job. I'm sorry because I hate the weight, love the 5D, but it's limit is tested in difficult focus conditions.

I do not think the difference in 30% pixels amounts too much, however, it's the focus speed and lock that counts for me that leaves the 5D compromized, where it should excel!

A "5Dx" for example, enhanced with 1D quality focus, would be worth to me an extra $1000!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Who has the sports shots with the 5D?

Well the 20D, at least is perfectly capably for much of what one needs.

See these soccer shots by Gary Ayala with the famous Bigma (sigma 50-500mm!) zoom.

So this clears the record on at least the 20D. Thanks to Gary's information.

Of course the 1DII would get a couple more shots but the 20D obbiously does a great job and the x1.6 factor is an added bonus!

Asher

 

[Kim Fullbrook]

You don't say what lens you're using. A prime lens with wider maximum aperture will be faster than a typical f4 zoom. In my experience all AF cameras struggle to focus in low light. Using CF4=1 based focussing (focus control moved off the shutter release to the back button) combined with the centre focus point only will be quicker once you get used to it.

From what I've heard about the 1DS you may gain in focus speed (if anything) but you will lose quality in higher noise. The added weight, bulk and conspicuousness will be a nuisance as well.

Another tip is to keep the mirror clean of dust & dirt. Dust can gather there before moving to the sensor so is obviously undesirable. If the mirror is dirty in the semi-transparent area leading to the focus sensors this can have a major effect on focus accuracy and speed. This explains why focus ability can degenerate with time, particularly on film cameras where cleanliness is less of a concern than with digital sensors.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Another tip is to keep the mirror clean of dust & dirt. Dust can gather there before moving to the sensor so is obviously undesirable. If the mirror is dirty in the semi-transparent area leading to the focus sensors this can have a major effect on focus accuracy and speed. This explains why focus ability can degenerate with time, particularly on film cameras where cleanliness is less of a concern than with digital sensors.

This is the first time I've seen that explanation. On the face of it, Dr. Spock would agree!

Is there other reference to this?

Asher

 

[John_Schwaller]

From what I've heard about the 1DS you may gain in focus speed (if anything) but you will lose quality in higher noise.

It has also been reported that while the 1Ds has faster AF, the 5D is slightly better in low light.

Also, if you are shooting in low light, you would want to focus (and recompose if necessary) using the center focal point, particularly is using a 2.8 or faster lens.

John

 

[Kim Fullbrook]

This is the first time I've seen that explanation. On the face of it, Dr. Spock would agree!

Is there other reference to this?

Asher

Not something I've seen described elsewhere but with several different EOS film bodies over 10+ years, I noticed that the focus accuracy deteriorated with time, then restored after cleaning the mirror.

With digital bodies there is so much importance attached to keeping the sensor clean that any serious photographer should already have suitable cleaning materials at hand. These can then be used to clean the mirror, mirror box, lenses, filters etc. Don't forget to clean the rear element of the lens - this can get very dusty and of course is very near the sensor when the shutter opens.

 

[Chuck Fry]

Be very careful cleaning the mirror! The reflective material is right on top, and is easy to scratch.

 

[Dan Lovell]

The 1DS Mark II provides a bit more high ISO level noise then does the 5D. The 5D provides better low light AF acquisition, however slower AF response time, but this is not dramatic.

The 5D generally has a better sensor.

The 1DS Mark II has a much better body, better ergonomics too.

The 1DS Mark II provides slightly better enlargements for it's more megapixels.

In summary, get the 1DS Mark II over the 5D if:

You want weather proofing, and/or print many enlargements. Harmonize these reasons with the $4,000+ increase in price between the 5D and 1DS Mark II.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I would just wait for the 1D mkIII, you get what will probably be the best AF in the world with zillions of cross sensors, because it's a crop body the AF sensors are nearer the edge than the 1Ds (same AF sensors but cropped viewfinder) and a 14 bit 10 megapixel sensor. 10fps if you are into that kind of thing.

Either that or the D2X has the fastest low light AF I've ever used.

Keep in mind that on canon cameras using the flash focus assist will slow the focus down in anything but very low light, in normal room lighting or a lit subject it's faster to turn the focus assist OFF! Substantially faster with a moving subject.

 

[Alan T. Price]

The only canon solution for getting AF sensors closer (rather than close) to the edge of the frame is to use a camera with a smaller sensor.

The 1D2, for example, has the same AF hardware as the 1Ds2 but because the sensor of the 1D2 is smaller the AF system covers a larger portion of it.

Also, the 1D-series 45-point AF system is an elliptical layout that bulks out more than the diamond pattern of the 5D,30D, etc. It is better if you want an AF sensor closer to corners of the frame, and has more sensors closer to the edges than does the diamond pattern, but it still only covers the middle portion of the image area.

 

[Steve Saunders]

Hi Tim. The F100 is a hard act to follow as it's AF is very fast indeed and in another class to the 5D. So I think they are differant beasts altogether. Likewise the D2X is the best low-light AF performer I've ever seen and used, I've been able to grab focus in very low light with mine when the Canon shooters around me (including 1DIIn and 1DsII shooters) were struggling and had to resort to MF to get the news shot. Having used the MkIII now, I have to say the situation is very different andit's at least as good if not beter than the Nikon. I'll know for sure when I've done some more low light shooting..
I'm not sure what type of shooting Canon targetted with the 5D, but it doesn't seem to be sports. A friend of mine does sports for a local paper and he has a 5D and 30D and he thinks the 30D AF is much more up to the job for fast action.