«

Hi, I'm torturing myself over this and I'd be interested in what other
people think. I know that only I can make the final decision, but I'm
posting this because people may have opinions which I haven't considered.

Anyway, I am a 10D owner living in the UK. Photography is the passion of my
life but I'm an amateur (albeit an obsessed one!). I've worked as a
journalist for more than 13 years and I realised a few years back that I'd
rather take pictures than write. I'd love to transfer my news skills into
photography but at the moment the writing pays the mortgage so I can't see
that happening anytime very soon.

I've recently been given the opportunity to buy a 1D Mark II for £1,000 (I
know, an absolute bargain). The owner had it as a gift and it's way too
advanced for him so he's agreed to sell it to me for £1,000.

I don't have a lot of spare cash so, so even with selling my 10D, I need to
think very carefully (and put off buying that Canon Macro lens I've been
saving for!)

The 1D Mark II would be fine for any news or sport work I may have to cover
in the future (if and when I make the career switch) and it would be a big
step up for my hobby work.

So, what to do? Stick with the 10D until I make a career move (by which time
it will probably be a museum piece) or sell it and raid the bank account to
buy the 1D Mark II? The new camera would probably be a bit over the top as a
hobbyist's piece of kit, but this really is such a bargain that I am very
tempted?

Any thoughts?

So...go to your employer and see about a raise now that you can take your
own photos to go with your stories. Saves them from having to supply a
photographer. Let the raise justify getting the better camera.

"Mike" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cn0ulh$ms9$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi, I'm torturing myself over this and I'd be interested in what other
> people think. I know that only I can make the final decision, but I'm
> posting this because people may have opinions which I haven't considered.
>
> Anyway, I am a 10D owner living in the UK. Photography is the passion of
my
> life but I'm an amateur (albeit an obsessed one!). I've worked as a
> journalist for more than 13 years and I realised a few years back that I'd
> rather take pictures than write. I'd love to transfer my news skills into
> photography but at the moment the writing pays the mortgage so I can't see
> that happening anytime very soon.
>
> I've recently been given the opportunity to buy a 1D Mark II for £1,000 (I
> know, an absolute bargain). The owner had it as a gift and it's way too
> advanced for him so he's agreed to sell it to me for £1,000.
>
> I don't have a lot of spare cash so, so even with selling my 10D, I need
to
> think very carefully (and put off buying that Canon Macro lens I've been
> saving for!)
>
> The 1D Mark II would be fine for any news or sport work I may have to
cover
> in the future (if and when I make the career switch) and it would be a big
> step up for my hobby work.
>
> So, what to do? Stick with the 10D until I make a career move (by which
time
> it will probably be a museum piece) or sell it and raid the bank account
to
> buy the 1D Mark II? The new camera would probably be a bit over the top as
a
> hobbyist's piece of kit, but this really is such a bargain that I am very
> tempted?
>
> Any thoughts?

Sell it and buy.
Otherwise...buy it and sell it to ME!

"Gene Palmiter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9pTkd.3426$4U1.1901@trndny05...
> So...go to your employer and see about a raise now that you can take your
> own photos to go with your stories. Saves them from having to supply a
> photographer. Let the raise justify getting the better camera.

Except that this isn't typically how it works.
If he's a journalist, he's taking notes, interviewing, recording press
conferences, making phone calls, etc. None of these are particularly
compatible with simultaneously taking photographs at newsworthy events.

If, on the other hand, he was doing a special assignment story, or other
report piece that isn't so time-sensitive/news-related, he might be able to
do both with regularity.

"Gene Palmiter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9pTkd.3426$4U1.1901@trndny05...
> So...go to your employer and see about a raise now that you can take your
> own photos to go with your stories. Saves them from having to supply a
> photographer. Let the raise justify getting the better camera.
>
>
You're not famliar with the world of newspapers are you :-) If I did that I
would be multi-skilling - and that would put a LOT of photographers' noses
seriously out of joint. I support their case actually - if the employers had
their way they would halve their editorial staff by making photographers
write stories and writers take pictures. It would save a lot of money, but
also drive standards in the industry even lower.

Mike wrote:

> Hi, I'm torturing myself over this and I'd be interested in what other
> people think. I know that only I can make the final decision, but I'm
> posting this because people may have opinions which I haven't considered.
>
> Anyway, I am a 10D owner living in the UK. Photography is the passion of my
> life but I'm an amateur (albeit an obsessed one!). I've worked as a
> journalist for more than 13 years and I realised a few years back that I'd
> rather take pictures than write. I'd love to transfer my news skills into
> photography but at the moment the writing pays the mortgage so I can't see
> that happening anytime very soon.
>
> I've recently been given the opportunity to buy a 1D Mark II for £1,000 (I
> know, an absolute bargain). The owner had it as a gift and it's way too
> advanced for him so he's agreed to sell it to me for £1,000.
>
> I don't have a lot of spare cash so, so even with selling my 10D, I need to
> think very carefully (and put off buying that Canon Macro lens I've been
> saving for!)
>
> The 1D Mark II would be fine for any news or sport work I may have to cover
> in the future (if and when I make the career switch) and it would be a big
> step up for my hobby work.
>
> So, what to do? Stick with the 10D until I make a career move (by which time
> it will probably be a museum piece) or sell it and raid the bank account to
> buy the 1D Mark II? The new camera would probably be a bit over the top as a
> hobbyist's piece of kit, but this really is such a bargain that I am very
> tempted?
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
As an owner of a 10D and 1D Mark II, I would say it really depends on your
use of the camera. The 10D is a marvelous camera, low noise, reasonable response
time, and more than adequate to make big enlargements. The advantage
of the 1D Mark II in my experience is its faster autofocus, and 8.5 frames
per second for capturing fast action. You can still do action work with the
10D, just maybe not the fastest, and to make the difference, you really need
top lenses. So unless you need more than 3 frames per second, you may be
better off getting more lenses first. The other advantage of the 1DII is that
it will autofocus at f/8 (e.g. an f/4 lens plus 2x TC). If that is important
to you, then the 1DII will be worth it. For me it was (frames per second,
faster autofocus, and focus at f/8). I also found it will focus with
stacked 1.4 and 2x TCs with an f/4 lens. But do you need that for your work?
The 8 versus 6 megapixels is not much difference in my opinion. If it is
to you, also consider the 20D.

Roger Clark
Photos, digital info (a lot on the 10D and 1D Mark II) at:
http://clarkvision.com

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
message news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> >
> As an owner of a 10D and 1D Mark II, I would say it really depends on your
> use of the camera. The 10D is a marvelous camera, low noise, reasonable
response
> time, and more than adequate to make big enlargements. The advantage
> of the 1D Mark II in my experience is its faster autofocus, and 8.5 frames
> per second for capturing fast action. You can still do action work with
the
> 10D, just maybe not the fastest, and to make the difference, you really
need
> top lenses. So unless you need more than 3 frames per second, you may be
> better off getting more lenses first. The other advantage of the 1DII is
that
> it will autofocus at f/8 (e.g. an f/4 lens plus 2x TC). If that is
important
> to you, then the 1DII will be worth it. For me it was (frames per second,
> faster autofocus, and focus at f/8). I also found it will focus with
> stacked 1.4 and 2x TCs with an f/4 lens. But do you need that for your
work?
> The 8 versus 6 megapixels is not much difference in my opinion. If it is
> to you, also consider the 20D.
>
> Roger Clark
> Photos, digital info (a lot on the 10D and 1D Mark II) at:
> http://clarkvision.com
>

Roger - Many thanks for your advice. I think the faster fps will be the main
factor that may sway my decision towards the 1DII because I'd like to get
more experience shooting sport, although as you rightly point out, the 10D
is capable of handling many sport shots and would be OK for me to practice
with.

The extra megapixels would be a bonus but it's not going to be the deciding
factor for me. As for the 20D - I won't be able to get one for £1,000 so the
1DII is a better deal :-)

Regards

Mike wrote:

> Roger - Many thanks for your advice. I think the faster fps will be the main
> factor that may sway my decision towards the 1DII because I'd like to get
> more experience shooting sport, although as you rightly point out, the 10D
> is capable of handling many sport shots and would be OK for me to practice
> with.
>
> The extra megapixels would be a bonus but it's not going to be the deciding
> factor for me. As for the 20D - I won't be able to get one for £1,000 so the
> 1DII is a better deal :-)
>

If it's the action you want, then go for it. It really is a great camera.
Be aware, however, that it is big and heavy. The size may mean you need
a new camera bag to hold it, and the bigger camera bags are more expensive.
Spare batteries are over $100, and you really need at least one
spare (I carry 2).

Roger

> Except that this isn't typically how it works.
> If he's a journalist, he's taking notes, interviewing,
> recording press conferences, making phone calls, etc. None of
> these are particularly compatible with simultaneously taking
> photographs at newsworthy events.

Depends if it's a big newspaper or not. The small country
newspaper I work for, each of the journalists has a small P&S
Sony cam for taking photos. We employ a fulltime photographer
as well, but he only does the more important stories, and
frontpage pics. Someone who could take great photos and write
the stories would be an asset to many a small newspaper.

-Chris D

"Chris D" <dicko-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:20041112131422.030d59bb.dicko-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Except that this isn't typically how it works.
> > If he's a journalist, he's taking notes, interviewing,
> > recording press conferences, making phone calls, etc. None of
> > these are particularly compatible with simultaneously taking
> > photographs at newsworthy events.
>
> Depends if it's a big newspaper or not. The small country
> newspaper I work for, each of the journalists has a small P&S
> Sony cam for taking photos. We employ a fulltime photographer
> as well, but he only does the more important stories, and
> frontpage pics. Someone who could take great photos and write
> the stories would be an asset to many a small newspaper.
>
> -Chris D

Yes. Point taken.
I was indeed thinking of bigger outfits.