1D or not to 1D
 

Hi guys i hope ive got this in the right section? but i need some advice from your good selves:)

I am a semi-professional motorsports photographer using a Canon 30D.
For years i have been told to get a 1D, but i have resisted the urge to spend a lot of money on one! (not a tough decision in todays climate) but.......
what is the big difference? is it really in my best interests to get one?
I feel like my images with my 30D are pin sharp enough so whats the difference with a 1D?
I dont need the 8.5fps as i only take one shot unless its a crash sequence (which im usually looking the wrong way for!)
Help!!!
Do i get a 1D? get my trusty 30D serviced? or flog the lot and get a Nikon D300?? aarrggghhh decisions!
I thank you for listening to me rant:)

Not an easy choice... the 1D series cameras have a much better AF system than the xxD ones (45 point vs 9 point), the AF is faster and more reliable. Other than that you probably wouldn't see a huge improvement, though I imagine that for motorsport faster AF would be a bonus. Other good features are weather sealing, centre point AF at f8, amazing build quality, dual card slots (CF and SD).

The original 1D was only 4mp and often gets bad reviews, however the mkII was 8.2mp and a real step up. In terms of image quality I don't think you'd see any real difference between a mkII and a 30D. The mkIII is 10mp and have the new 14bit processing system which does give even better images, but secondhand they're ~£700 more than a mkII!

As for the D300... from reading reviews it does seem that Nikon are currently leading the way and that there AF system is better than Canon's. Apparently lots of pros have made the change to the dark side, but that comparing the 1D to Nikon's D3 (not the D300). But changing system won't be cheap, and who knows what the new 1D mkIV will be like (rumour has it it will be announced this week).

thank you for your reply.
So basically it will focus faster, hmmm thats what i thought. So basically my keeper rate will improve because the auto focus wont keep jumping off the subject! Thats interesting!
Yeah its a dilemma, the 1D mk 2 is around £1000 second hand where the Mk 2 N is £1200 secondhand. The D300 is £1200 brand new!

The body is the easy bit, it's when you add in the cost of changing lenses that changing system get's expensive.

If you shop about a bit you should be able to pick up a mkII for ~£800-850 and a mkIIN for ~£1000-1100, whether then N is worth the extra is the big question.

If i could find one at that price i would be happier but everywhere i look its the top end of the price scale i mentioned.
Decisions decisions lol
thanks again for your replies

I would suggest you look at the new 7D, it has a very much improved 19 point focusing system and its fast. I have one but still in the testing mode with birds in flight and Wow! what a difference from earlier models.
The expanded spot focusing with A1-servo for keeping fast moving birds in focus works like a dream but like I said I still have a lot more testing to do.

Check out what other people are saying about this Camera before making a final decision on switching. Eventually I will put review on what I really think about it at the moment I am still in the Wow! I didn't know it did that stage.LOL!

dont throw any more cameras at my poor confused brain :-)

surely the main difference I would have thought is that this is a full frame camera, go for one I reckon

the 1D series are APS-H cameras (1.3x crop), it's the 1Ds series that are full frame. Personally I prefer the 1Ds' but they tend to cost a good chunk more and have a much slower frame rate which could be an issue for a sport shooter.

I stand corrected :)

If you're doing motorsport, then presumably the reduced effective focal length would be a disadvantage on a full frame camera?

yeah it would be, my 300mm wouldnt be as close on certain corners as it is on the 30D!
but maybe thats a sacrifice i can make :-)

If you buy the 1D you will develop much bigger muscles! I have recently bought the 7D and agree with Christine that it looks very very good, dare I say it but a Nikon D300 killer once the price has settled down. Strangely enough the last test of the Nikon I read (about the D300S) was slightly muted in it's praise. "Images appear slightly noisy at ISO 200" and "The only time autofocus struggles is with fast moving subjects when servo focus is used" while admitting that this is pretty common and that with 7fps some will be sharp. "Image quality, generally very sound but lacks the clarity of some models in this class and JPEGS are best avoided". Practical Photography magazine and I have picked out the bad bits but perhaps the honeymoon period for the D300 is over. !D or 7D and keep your existing lenses I say.

There is no comparison, been using a 1D Mk3 for several years now, for everything from sport to weddings. I also have a 30D which sits on the shelf at home and two 40Ds one as a back up the other my wife uses.

I seldom use the 40D, the 1D is way ahead of the rest, on focusing, down load rate, FPS, buffer size, focal points etc. The 1.3 drop is not a disadvantage either, I often use a 70 - 200 for sport work and return good results.

Saying this I am investing in a 1DS Mk3 at the end of the year and 2 5D Mk2s, but only for our wedding work for which they are more suited. If funds allow, I will be upgrading to the 1D MkIV in due course, once the lumps have been ironed out.

I would guess that a future 1D mark 4 (logic suggests a mark 4), would have similar functions to the new 7D. Build quality is better on the 7D and 1D series than your current 30D. If money was no object a future 1D mark4 might be the ticket. 7D focus tracking is simply breathtaking, and dare I say better than the 1D mark3.
However, assuming no manufacturer change, other than build quality durability and higher shutter count, if you're going to take sport photography seriously, system accessories are also a consideration. The 1D series have compatability for FTP and/or PTP (wiring) images directly from your body to your laptop, or remote server. If it doesn't sound like something you will use now, you might need it in the future, particularly on a paid job where time/speed of picture delivery is a big factor. Doesn't matter how good or bad the camera is if you have the images with you, and they need to be half a mile down the track back at the press office.
In the real world I would say go for the newest version of a s/h 1D series body you can afford.

If you were shooting professionally. Then absolutely. Get the 1d.

Frame rate, buffers, faster focusing as well as reliability, ruggedness and the quality of image output as well as several other designs that are aimed squarely at a working professional.

If you don't aim to work professionally, then its probably overkill.