| 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 II, IIn Advice Sought...
William Maner, Photographer
 |
Biloxi | MS | USA | Posted: 7:41 PM on 10.06.08 |
->> I've looked over some threads in the archives and didn't see anything or recent nature, so I'm posting a message to seek advice about some "old" cameras.
Currently I have a Canon Mark I with low actuations and high serial number.. The actuation count is still under 40K. I bought a 40D several months ago to have a second DSLR that would give me something of a more flexible non sports camera.
I'm looking for a third DSLR body. I'm leaning more towards a Mark II series body because of the better(?) high ISO performance and the higher mp count than the Mark I.
I would use the third body more for sports. I was thinking about using the Mark II-series camera with a 300mm and 1.4x extender, while using a 70-200 on the Mark I body. I'd use the 40D for wide angle shots and jube shots.
I've seen some good prices on used Mark II series cameras.. The IIn seems to go for about $600-800 more than the Mark II. Considering the fact that the Mark III is now Canon's current "main" camera, what would be the better value between the Mark II and IIn?
I thought by posing this question, I'd get a more updated assessment of how the two models compare and what would be the best value.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and comments. |
|
Juliann Tallino, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Port Townsend/Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 8:29 PM on 10.06.08 |
| ->> Either one is a good deal right now, pick the one that fits the budget. I use a Mark II and it's a great body. The N has a bigger lcd screen. Big step up from the 1D that's for sure, you'll be happy with either version. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 10:29 PM on 10.06.08 |
| ->> FYI, there is a used Mark IIN for sale in the classifieds. It has the lowest price I've seen for an N body. You might want to check it out. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 10:34 PM on 10.06.08 |
| ->> IIn |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 10:43 PM on 10.06.08 |
| ->> I much prefer my IIN to the II I sold to buy it, or my 1D. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 11:53 PM on 10.06.08 |
| ->> You're gonna want the IIn...if for no other reason than the LCD. |
|
Francis Specker, Photographer
|
Riverside | CA | USA | Posted: 12:09 AM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> The IIn also has a bigger buffer, which is a big plus if you shoot raw. |
|
Rafael Agustin Delgado, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Pasadena / Fullerton | Ca | USA | Posted: 12:28 AM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> since I bought the MarkIIn my original 1d cameras have been gathering dust as back up duty or loaners to my buddies. You will notice the difference when you process the RAW images from the newer line. The rest is simply gravy on the top like the buffer rate and the battery life is my favorite upgrade. |
|
Adam Cairns, Photographer
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 10:01 AM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> Aside from screen size and buffer, what else is different between the II and IIn? |
|
Matt Barton, Photographer
|
Lexington | KY | USA | Posted: 10:43 AM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> IIn AF is better. |
|
Vasha Hunt, Photographer
|
Opelika | AL | USA | Posted: 10:48 AM on 10.07.08 |
->> More options for the 2 card (back-up to each, move concurrently from 1 to 2) and the stall at image #9999 is fixed. I also think the AF is a bit better on the IIn.
V |
|
Scott Evans, Photographer
|
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 12:39 PM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> what about the AA filter? I heard the II has a much stronger filter. If that's true, I think the IIn would be better if you have to transmit or want a little less time in post. Either still needs some capture sharpening if you shoot RAW so maybe its a push/ Thoughts? |
|
Jay Adeff, Photographer
|
Salinas | CA | USA | Posted: 4:48 PM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> There is no difference in the AA filter between the MkII and the MkIIn. The MkIIn had higher default in-camera sharpening for JPG's because people who upgraded from the original 1D to the MkII were complaining about out-of-camera JPG's not being as sharp. The problem was that they were not used to the new CMOS sensor since the 1D had a CCD sensor. Those of us who came from the 10D/20D cameras had no issues at all. The MkII can be configured by the user to give the same sharpness as the MkIIn. |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 6:47 PM on 10.07.08 |
| ->> No brainer mk 11n . Much improved camera. |
|
Scott Dreslinski, Photographer
|
Rochester Hills | MI | US | Posted: 11:40 PM on 10.07.08 |
->> >>>>>" No brainer mk 11n . Much improved camera."
$1000+ worth better?
I am also considering picking up a MkII or MkIIN.
Looking at the used prices for MkII, I see they are going for around $1400-$1500.
MkIIN's seem to be going around $2500-$2600.
Just trying to decide if it is really worth the extra money.
Thanks |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|