[moff_quigley]

My wife is a photog and she's been easing into weddings. We've had a few lately. I do all the grunt work for her (carry bags, setup and teardown etc) and during the ceremony I'll be the 2nd shooter. Working out pretty well. We work well together and some of my shots have been chosen for prints and some have been included in albums. Anyhoo...

I'm probably going to get her a 5D shortly (current body is 30D). While shopping for cameras I've come across a low "mileage" 1DS (not a Mark II or III). I think I'd like to get this for myself. I've been using a Rebel XT. Once the 5D is purchased the 30D would be "my" body. I'm sure the 1DS will be quite the jump over the XT but the 30D has newer tech etc. Worth it or should I be happy with the 30D?

 

[Silver]

Control system is totally different.

I have to think you'd be better off with a newer body. For example, a 40D autofocuses much faster in dim light than a 1DsMk2 does...I'd stick with what you have.

 

[Transcend]

The original 1d models had TERRIBLE battery life. The HIgh ISO performance is also not great. Unless you desperately need full frame, i would suggest a 1dmk2 or a 1dsmk2 even,if you can spare the extra $.

 

[moff_quigley]

Thanks gents. Kinda what I was figuring. 1DMKII could be an option. The MKII and MKIII DS's are out of my price range ATM. Hmmm...maybe a 50D and a 5D would be a good combo.

 

[blue]

1DS is a great landscape or studio portrait body where AF, crap high-ISO performance, and battery life are a non-issue.

The Kodak DCS Pro body of the same vintage (uses Nikon F-mount lenses & full frame CMOS) is similar in that regard and goes for around $500...great studio bodies.

I think a 1DMkII and 5D would be a better combo for a budget setup covering most of an all-around photographer's needs...the 50D would seem a little redundant, and is nowhere nearly as nice to use (as a Mark II).

 

[moff_quigley]

I think a 1DMkII and 5D would be a better combo for a budget setup covering most of an all-around photographer's needs...the 50D would seem a little redundant, and is nowhere nearly as nice to use (as a Mark II).

I don't disagree about the 1DmkII and 5D combo...but 50D redundant to a 5D? How so?

 

[blue]

I don't disagree about the 1DmkII and 5D combo...but 50D redundant to a 5D? How so?

Same AF, a little quicker, nicer screen, smaller sensor...The MarkII will give you better image quality, obscenely quick AF/shooting speed/speed of operation, the ability to survive a nuclear blast, great feel in hand, and (I hate to say it) street cred. When I toted around a D2X with a 70-200 people got out of my way.

If you haven't used a 1D of any iteration, I'd suggest going to a camera store and firing some test shots with one and a 50D back to back and seeing which one you want more.