Dan, Ken, or Steve - Canon 1D question.

[polarsusd81]

Any of you guys ever use the original 1D? I found a great deal on one and wanted to see what you guys know about them. One of the main concerns would be battery life. I would be shooting without post-shot review to conserve battery, but do you guys know about how many shots one could get with a fully charged battery? I know it is only a 4.1 MP sensor but from what I have read, the images have much more life to them than even the newer lower end bodies. The AF performance is one of the huge advantages of the camera. I guess I am trying to find out if I should really do it or not.

[Steve Foss]

Tom, I have only shot the 1D a couple of times, and I don't know what to tell you about battery life.

As for owning the 1D compared with other cameras, you're getting into so many tradeoffs of age and performance that a person could write a book on them. IMO there was a huge level of improvement in the 1 series after Canon split it into the two separate lines. The 1Ds and 1D Mk2 each provided strong advances over the 1D, and there are 1D2 and 1Ds bodies on the market with tons of life left in them for around $1,000.

There's no doubt the silky shutter button, autofocus performance and a bunch of other 1 series goodies are much better than even the newest entry-level bodies, and that can have an impact on a photographer's performance. If a certain piece of gear makes a person feel better about their work and more interested in it, then that's a good piece of gear to own.

That being said, for me it would depend on just how good the deal was. I mean, if I found a 1D for $300 I might jump on it, while at $600 I'd pass it by.

I don't worry much about Mp count. I've seen large prints from the 4.1 Mp 1D that were stunning. I'm interested in where you read the 1D images have more "life" to them than the lower-end bodies. I've shot a lot of 1 series bodies, as well as using the xxD series bodies daily, and using low-end bodies a backups for a couple years, and I can't say I agree with the idea that native IQ from the 1D has more life than lower-end camera bodies.

Lots, lots to think about when making such a decision. For me, saving a bit more and picking up a 1D2 would be the route to take. That's just me though.

Good topic. Makes a person think things through. It'll be real interesting to hear Dan's and Ken's perspectives on this.

[polarsusd81]

Well it is at 400, so it is a little more than your number to pull the trigger, but well below what you said you wouldn't consider it. I might see if I could get it for 350. I talked to the guy and he said they get about 400 shots with 5 second review.

Sorry, it was in comparing to some of the earlier bodies. I misread some reviews on the other FM.

The seller is a pretty high end advertising photographer.

Your point about being more interested because of a certain piece of gear would definitely apply in this scenario. Don't get me wrong the XT is great, but having the XT in combo with a 1D would be awesome at that price.

Maybe I am getting overly excited.

[Steve Foss]

Tom, the excitement is understandable. Any time I have a 1 series in my hand, I'm VERY reluctant to return it to its owner.

But 400 images on a battery charge is horrible. You couldn't even shoot a wedding on one charge. How many batteries does it come with? My guess would be a new 1D battery should hold for many more images than that, and if these are the original batteries they are well worn out, probably. I don't know if the 1D uses the same batteries as the the rest of the 1 series (up to the Mk3, which uses a different battery).

If so, it's easy to get new batteries. Canon still sells them, and so do some knock-off companies. If it takes its own battery and not those in the later 1 series, I'd definitely find out if you can still get some of them.

And we haven't talked about shutter count. I believe the 1D was rated to 200,000 shutters. If this guy's a pro and has used that body since it came out, it may well be that it's approached or exceeded the shutter rating. Do you have a shutter count from him?

Edit: OK, did a little searching and found on the B&H Web site that the 1D takes the same battery as the rest of the 1 series until the Mk3, so you can still buy them. However, that'll definitely drive up the cost of your purchase. I haven't priced out the knock-offs, but the Canon 1D batteries run about $120 new. If he's only including one battery that gets 400 images per charge, I'd definitely tell him $350 is as high as you'll go. If there are two batteries that seem OK, and if the 1D simply used so much battery power that 400 is all you can get (the later the camera model, the more efficient they seem to be on power consumption), then I'd be inclined to pay the money. Battery charge may not be a big issue for the guy. If he did most of his ad work in studio, he could just use the adapter and plug the camera into a wall outlet for power. You won't have that option.

Edit II: Canon says a freshly charged good battery in the 1D should be good for 500 images at normal operating temps, so it appears the camera simply was a hog for power consumption. I don't know if that was RAW or JPEG numbers, or if it matters which mode is used. It might be that more shots can be gotten in jpeg mode since they are smaller files. So maybe it boils down to how many batteries the guy's including. And shutter count, of course.

[finnbay]

I have no personal experience with the 1D. The only person I know who used and/or uses one is a newspaper guy who bought one when studying to be a journalist in college. He now works for a paper, has had the camera overhauled at least once, and uses nothing else. I guess it's a testimonial of sorts. No other thoughts besides what Steve said as to improvements in sensors and other features since the 1D.

[Dbl]

I have shot the 1D a few times, I do prefer the Mark II. The 400 shot per battery seems to be around the average for that camera. That has always been the knock on it. The next big concern would definitely be shutter count. Replacing a shutter on a 1 series is $350 to $475. Suddenly that $350 or $400 dollar camera my not be such a great deal.

A lot of guys keep a 1D around because of the flash sync speed, if I recall it is 1/400s. Nice feature to have. I know sports guys that keep one around as a backup just for that reason alone.

For me the shutter count would a big factor. That camera is still producing beautiful images, but there may be better values to consider. As a remote, backup type camera with high sync speeds I would consider it, as a primary...well I would have to think hard about that.

[polarsusd81]

I will find out a bit more and have to ponder the decision overnight I think. Sleep on it and see what I think tomorrow morning.

[Steve Foss]

I never counted specifically, but even when using IS lenses I've been routinely able to get well beyond 1,500 images from a 1D2 or 2n with a fresh battery. On the recent sharp-tailed grouse shoot with Ken I was using a 1D Mk3 and an IS lens and captured about 1,300 jpegs before the battery dropped down to 2/3 full. They just seem to get better and better on power consumption.

Now, the autofocus motor uses a lot of battery power on the 1D, and if you use it for posed work you'd be able to leave it on manual focus, which would help. In a wedding situtation, you could continue to use your XT for candids with a longer lens and reserve the 1D for the posed images. In many posed wedding situations, you could even use the power adapter and an extension cord and run off a wall outlet. If you have two batteries for it and can also use electrical power, that'd be plenty for most weddings. Also in most cases, when one battery is done you can usually have it charging somewhere nearby while you're using up the second battery.

Just some more food for thought. You already know which way I'd go. But I'll add that if you get two good batteries and the shutter count isn't over half way toward the rated max, I'd be very tempted to pick it up at $350-400.

On the other hand, for $400 or a bit over you could pick up a good used 30D and have a more modern camera with more megapixels and excellent noise performance. Ahhh, the options never end!

[polarsusd81]

I think I have decided against it. I asked for a shutter count and if there was an additional battery and I got a "no" for both questions. I think it is safe to say I wont get that one.

Thanks for the help guys. It seemed like a great deal at first, but upon further review, better to use the money for something else.

The battery consumption really does seem poor. Thinking about what I get with the grip and sterling teks in the XT, the 1D isn't even worth comparing. I just didn't know what you guys get with the big boy cameras.

[finnbay]

Sorry to chime in late with this (although already been covered) it's not unusual for me to get 2000+ clicks with my Mark II and a good battery.

[Steve Foss]

Tom, my next body will almost certainly be a 1D Mk2 or Mk2n. You can find lightly used Mk2 bodies all day long on used Web sites for $1,000 to $1,200. It's worth saving for.

The fact that they wouldn't give you a shutter count is telling. You can easily find out the shutter count on a 1 series Canon body. I'd bet this one is WAY up there.

[Dbl]

Well Tom that makes it a no brainer, no shutter count, no sale! Especially on a 1D! I'm with Ken and am normally +2,000 shots per battery on the IIN. The 50D from what I can see is even better than that. Better than the 20D/30D.

[finnbay]

Dan, I agree. I've got the grip with the two batteries for the 50D, and it seems like 2-3 weeks between changes sometimes. I don't shoot a lot, every day, but I shoot every day.