Review on 📷 Canon EOS 1D Mark II N Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) (OLD MODEL) by Alfredo Testerman

This is a great camera! I bought mine in February 2006 and have been using it consistently for over 2 months before deciding to write this review. Firstly, I'm an avid amateur photographer and was wondering if this camera was worth the price for a layman. I have found that I have not regretted this purchase in any way. I researched for a few months and even bought the Digital Rebel XT in the beginning because I figured it would be best not to spend that much on a camera (I love the Rebel XT and it's a fun rear camera). camera of your choice. Most official reviewers didn't review it either, because there wasn't a "big" difference, by the way. es and the ID Mark II or simply put if you want to shoot sports or fast action then the 1D Mark II N is for you. I don't shoot these. I am a bridal/portrait painter. However, I also shoot landscapes and fast-moving animals and needed the weather protection and speed that the Mark II N offers. So the choice between the 5D, the (then) forthcoming 30D and the 1D Mark II N was an obvious choice. very complicated. A professional review site said the Mark II N was an unnecessary upgrade from the Mark II. I found that comment odd because Canon changed almost everything they didn't like about the Mark II. You can record in RAW and JPEG on different cards at the same time. A 2.5" LCD that can be zoomed in from anywhere to check sharpness, there's clearly no noise in shadow areas and you don't need to use it with an L lens to get great photos. Aside from my L lenses, I use 50mm 1.4, 70-300 DO and 85mm 1.8 with consistently excellent image quality. that it compensates for any camera shake that I might have due to the weight with its speed. And now that I've gotten used to it, I hardly notice it anymore. The many control buttons can be confusing, but if you're used to the Rebel XT, keep the manual handy first when shooting with the 1D Mark II. lose quality (in my opinion) due to the lack of 12 megapixel 5D (which was one of the two reasons I considered 5D). High magnifications (16 x 20) print great and you have the speed to NEVER miss a picture. I have found that when photographing portraits of difficult to capture subjects (kids, pets, someone who does NOT want to pose for a portrait but the woman is forcing them.) SPEED is important and has often saved me from a bad shoot. !Crop factor of 1.3x FOV (compared to 5D full frame) is definitely a factor to consider. Honestly, I use the 17-40L and I get great landscape photos. As wide (at 22mm) as I could wish for without getting a fish eye. So I don't see the crop factor as a personal issue, but I should have taken that into account when making my selection. While it limits my 24-70L and 24-105L to just a 31.2mm wide angle, it gives my 70-300 DO IS "enough" additional magnification (up to 390mm) so I don't have to buy another expensive lens . I've tried to remind myself of this camera's shortcomings in order to give a balanced picture. As said, the problem initially was the weight and learning the controls. Both were quickly overcome. Cost is definitely a factor, but especially for those who make a living out of it, it's definitely worth those dollars. I love everything about this cell (and I've gone through several others to get here). When I don't have it with me and I'm with my A620 (my emergency camera "in my purse") I get so frustrated that the A620 doesn't even come close to doing what I now expect as standard all cameras. I think that's the only downside as it's a large DSLR, I don't necessarily (though almost!) carry it everywhere. Overall, though, I don't think there's a better camera on the market unless you're willing to pay around $7,000 for Ds and extra megapixels. I understand that while this review doesn't cover all the specs (you can get it from cnet.com or the-digital-picture.com), I hope it helps someone like me who was having a really hard time making the final decision hold true . .