Talk:Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Name

Isn't the actual name Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II N? --DonOst 23:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. The 1D Mark II was revised to become the Mark II N; there was no equivalent revision made to the 1Ds series. The current high-end full frame body in the Canon lineup is, as of this comment, still the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II. --130.194.11.64 04:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

I own a 1DsMk2 and am going to take a few good photos of the rear of mine with the display and rear controls and also some from different angles, then I will leave it up to someone else to decide which are good enough (if any) to be included in this entry after I upload them to the gallery here, which I still have to learn how to use ... one thing that bothers me about this is article the claim that it is "waterproof" ... it is certainly NOT waterproof, and Canon has never made such a claim ... "weather-resistant" is used several times in the operating manual, and I've seen "weather-proof" used sparingly

Waterproof

the word 'waterproof' carries serious weight and means that the item can be submerged in water without being damaged (I'm sure that isn't the best or most verbose definition, but it's the idea that's important here) ... this camera, as well as the entire '1D line' including the original 1D, 1Ds, 1D MarkII, 1D MarkIIn, 1Ds MarkII and the newest one, the 1D MarkIII are all very rugged and are weather-proof, meaning that they can be used in light rain/dust without any damage, but that's only when certain of the premium professional quality "L" lenses are used with it, because they have a rubber seal that seals the joint between the camera body and the lens at the lens mount ... (NOT all L glass has the rubber lens mount seal either, a few of them don't have it)

I have changed "waterproof" to "weather-resistant", but if someone disagrees, go ahead and change it to something more suitable ... but do your homework first -- http://www.dpreview.com has excellent reviews and technical data on this camera here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dsmkii/

Mark III?

Does Canon have any plans to issue a new edition of the Canon EOS 1Ds cam? The EOS 1Ds Mark II has been running for almost 3 years now. Does anybody know something on an EOS 1Ds Mark III? If yes it should be put into this article. --Krawunsel 12:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 1Ds Mk III was announced today. That it wasn't in the article before today is right and proper; Wikipedia does not deal in rumours about future products, as a rule. -- 130.194.11.64 05:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm editing the line about the low pass filter, because it's ambiguous and misleading. All current DSLR's have a low pass filter for purposes of anti-aliasing--NOT just the 5D. The information before editing is similar to saying "The 1DsmkII has a Canon EF lens mount, just like it's sister model 5D." It is meaningless to point out they both had low-pass filters. A more interesting comparison (but still not relevant out of context) is that medium format digital backs with similar pixel count omit a low pass filter to maximise resolution, but at the cost of moire, which is not as easily removed in post and can be time consuming to remove. Point being, that would be a technical advantage to shooting this camera over a medium format alternative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.27.229.48 (talk) 23:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error in article?

Hi everyone. Isn't the sensor on this camera 28.7 x 19.1 mm, not 24 mm × 36 mm as stated in the article? My source is the DPReview article and an owner I know telling me it wasn't a full-frame sensor, but someone must have had some reason for putting that into the article. And this model was around for a few years, so maybe things changed. Can anyone clarify this? Thanks. Drakkenfyre (talk) 08:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're thinking of the sports-orientated Canon EOS-1D Mark II, which had an APS-H sensor. The 1Ds range was full-frame. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:10, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]