| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Canon Mark IIN...worth the upgrade?
Eric Jones, Photographer
 |
Greenville | NC | USA | Posted: 5:54 PM on 02.15.06 |
->> I haven't read much on the Mark IIN here so was wondering for those who have made the jump over to the new camera are you happy with the purchase?
I have the Mark II and along with others I have that focusing problem after the first shot and also the softness of the picture kills me. I read the article that Brad M. wrote about the sharpness on the new camera and he has me itching to get the new Mark IIN. So, for all those who have made the jump please let us know if you see a difference, for one the sharpness of your photos and two has the focusing after that first shot seem to hit the spot?
Thanks for any reply.
EKJ |
|
Michel Fortier, Photographer
|
Naples | FL | USA | Posted: 6:07 PM on 02.15.06 |
| ->> Yes, definitely worth the upgrade. I have both and I tend to use the N much more so than the regular MkII. The extra controls you have over the color matrix, better menu ergonomics plus the silent advance mode does it for me. The only downside I have with my N is the fact it'll drain a battery overnight if left on whereas the MkII will not. May be an issue with my particular N. |
|
Michael Stevens, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:41 PM on 02.15.06 |
->> I can't speak from personal experience but after chatting with SI's John McDonough at a recent Phoenix Suns game he said the difference between the 1D.2 and 1D.2n is like the difference between the 1D and the 1D.2. He specifically said the noise at 800 on the 1D.2n is like 400 on the 1D.2. And I think we've all heard the talk that the focus issue that some 1D.2 bodies had is gone with the 1D.2n bodies.
Mike |
|
Ron Scheffler, Photographer
|
Hamilton (Toronto area) | Ontario | Canada | Posted: 12:36 AM on 02.16.06 |
->> I upgraded to the N in December but sold the Mark II so can no longer do a side by side comparision. My sports photography is somewhat seasonal so haven't yet had a real chance to test the N in that respect.
So far I haven't seen a huge difference, but I definitely have a favorable impression of the N. I'm not sure that I had the focus problem with my Mark II. There are minor build differences with the N compared to the Mark II, or so it seems to me, in that the N feels slightly more refined in the way the dials and buttons operate. Maybe my Mark II was simply getting worn out? The larger screen is also nice, but it is not bright enough under full sun, though the viewing angle is much better.
It's difficult to side by side compare the N and the Mark II in terms of color matrix/picture styles. Same with in camera sharpening. I shoot everything Raw+Jpeg and prefer to use the raw files when possible. While I still had the Mark II, I updated Canon's DPP converter to version 2.0.3 and found that something didn't really seem to translate properly when using Mark II files with the new picture styles. Colors were a bit off to my eyes. With earlier versions of DPP I would often use the Faithful setting which for certain scenes would do an amazing job enhancing colors without being too overboard... great blues, greens... with the switch to 2.0.3, I couldn't match that color quality and ended up using Neutral most of the time and pumping up the saturation. Now with the N, I find the picture styles seem to mesh better with the N Raws and do like the results I get from the Standard picture style better than Neutral most of the time (though you have to watch as highlights seem to clip faster in Standard). Standard seems to be similar to the way Faithful used to be with earlier versions of DPP.
Sharpening is interesting... I have it set to 3 on the scale of 0 to 7. I find this gives me good sharpness for editing in Photo Mechanic. If I was shooting only Jpeg files and didn't have the Raw files to fall back on, I would likely set sharpening to 2.... With my Mark II I had always left sharpening at zero. The jpeg files were never extremely sharp, but difficult to say if the new N is any different for me with sharpening off. I definitely believe the N jpeg files benefit from some sharpening.
Now, what is really interesting is comparing N Raw files converted with DPP 2 against the camera created Jpegs.... wow. I took a camera jpeg with no in-camera sharpening - opened it in PS - it looked soft. I applied USM of 400, 0.3, 0 and it looked pretty good (of course, USM settings depend a lot on the image content). Opened the unsharpened DPP converted raw file and it looked better (more detail) than the USM sharpened Jpeg file! Added the same USM as applied to the Jpeg, and wow, what a difference, in favor of the Raw.
So far my opinion is that maximum sharpness out of the N is through Raw conversions. I haven't really given the Photoshop Raw converter a shot yet, nor C1 because I actually like the look of DPP's conversions. If you have to shoot Jpegs, they will probably look a bit soft. Depending on your client/work requirements, you might not want to use in camera sharpening, but if you do, I'd suggest at least 2 or 3, though at times 3 might be slightly too much.
Some other thoughts:
Today I also discovered that leaving the N on all day drained the battery. Interesting! I thought it was a fluke situation where maybe the way it was resting on soft material was pushing a button and keeping the camera active... I'll have to keep an eye on this.
I use some lenses faster than f/2.8 and bought the new Ec-S screen. Wow, I can finally manually focus again with confidence. The screen makes it very easy to see the exact plane of focus. It's a toss up whether it helps at all with 2.8 lenses, and for sure with lenses slower than 2.8 the screen is quite dark. Maybe 1-2 stops darker than the standard screen... But I think this makes sense and helps with the super fast lenses. My impression of the standard screen is that with certain lenses it can almost be too bright, making it difficult to really see the plane of focus - almost like slight smearing of the image on the screen (might be my eyes).
I shoot a lot at ISO 400 & 800. Maybe there is a difference (improvement) with the N. Some over at Rob Galbraith claim there is. I'm not sure. I still find it necessary to run those files through Noise NInja to clean them up. 1600 is definitely usable after NN.
Lastly, I upgraded to two N bodies. Both of them required adjustment for front focusing. One wasn't very bad, but the other was quite noticeable. So, in that respect, it appears some things have not changed compared to earlier 1D bodies. |
|
Richard Denham, Photographer
|
Niagara/Toronto/Buffalo | On | Canada | Posted: 8:43 AM on 02.16.06 |
| ->> Ron, next time you do a bulldogs game let me know, i'd love to see that badboy in action. |
|
Eric Jones, Photographer
|
Greenville | NC | USA | Posted: 12:57 PM on 02.16.06 |
->> To be sure there are more people out there with the Mark IIN that has some feedback???
Anyone??? |
|
Roddy MacLeod, Photographer
|
Bensheim | Hessen | Germany | Posted: 1:34 PM on 02.16.06 |
->> I just got mine Eric, but I can't give you any real feedback yet because a) I haven't shot action with it and b) I am coming from a 300D -- so every camera is nice to me.
But, I will be shooting a motocross in Belgium this weekend and I should have some comments after that. |
|
Eric Jones, Photographer
|
Greenville | NC | USA | Posted: 2:02 PM on 02.16.06 |
->> Roddy...yes, please let me know how it goes.
Thanks
Eric |
|
Chad Engle, Photographer
|
Barbourville | KY | USA | Posted: 3:08 PM on 02.16.06 |
| ->> I have both II and IIN which I purchased as soon as it came on the market. I have used the IIN almost daily since I have owned it. I feel the AF, sharpness and color are much better and the noise at 800 up is much less than the II. I hardly ever get a blown shot due to back focus and no focus. Upgrade you will not be disappointed! |
|
Robert Smith, Photographer
|
Brandon | MS | USA | Posted: 3:57 PM on 02.16.06 |
| ->> Eric: I upgraded about a month ago and I am VERY happy with the N. I have had the MKII(non N) for about 18 months and was not at all disappointed with it. But, I talked to several other photographers and they persuaded me to upgrade. Man...what a difference. Sharpness of JPEGS out of the camera are much sharper and clearer and the color is outstanding. I have no scientific proof, but I swear the AF is much better. I had trouble with the AF on the MKII when the subject was coming directly at me. This camera seems to have conquered that. |
|
Roddy MacLeod, Photographer
|
Bensheim | Hessen | Germany | Posted: 4:56 AM on 02.17.06 |
| ->> Will do Eric. |
|
Roddy MacLeod, Photographer
|
Bensheim | Hessen | Germany | Posted: 1:21 PM on 02.21.06 |
| ->> Lommel was cancelled due to the excessive rain in Belgium. I still haven't tested "action" with my Mark II N! :( |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|