lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
I know everyone else is going nuts over the new Canon offering.
Problem is, I've never really used a Canon DSLR (I use a Digilux 3 DSLR and a couple of rangefinders) so I don't know if that camera is a good fit for an RF shooter.
Just looking at the menu options and the body makes my head spin. Am I alone in this?
The reason I'm asking is that I can either continue acquiring 4/3rds gear (and lenses) or I can begin moving to the evil Canon side and I figured there would be shooters with a similar disposition (RF) to me on here.
Any feedback would be GREATLY appreciated.
Problem is, I've never really used a Canon DSLR (I use a Digilux 3 DSLR and a couple of rangefinders) so I don't know if that camera is a good fit for an RF shooter.
Just looking at the menu options and the body makes my head spin. Am I alone in this?
The reason I'm asking is that I can either continue acquiring 4/3rds gear (and lenses) or I can begin moving to the evil Canon side and I figured there would be shooters with a similar disposition (RF) to me on here.
Any feedback would be GREATLY appreciated.
cmedin
Well-known
What is it you're expecting out of a 5D Mark II that your current gear isn't offering?
It's a great camera, and I considered it before picking up a used 1Ds II instead -- to me the pro build and superb AF system held more importance than slightly higher resolution and HD video. So not ALL of us are going nuts over it.
It's a great camera, and I considered it before picking up a used 1Ds II instead -- to me the pro build and superb AF system held more importance than slightly higher resolution and HD video. So not ALL of us are going nuts over it.
Chris101
summicronia
If I had a boat that was always drifting away, I'd have the perfect use for a 5D.
Just kidding Canonphiles!
Just kidding Canonphiles!
totifoto
Well-known
I had the old 5D and was waiting for the new one. When it arrived and I saw it has that video thingy in it I bought a 1D mark IIN.
If I want video camera I buy "a video camera"
If I want video camera I buy "a video camera"
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
I guess I'd probably like the output of the sensor. It's the sheer bulk of the camera and lenses that would keep me from ever using the damn thing.
cmedin
Well-known
Refusing to buy a camera because of it having a feature you don't like is kind of silly -- it's not like it forces you to use video. I can see if it was LACKING in some area (sensor, AF, frames/second) but if it was everything you wanted and also happened to do video, why would you even care about that part?
I just don't get some people...
My 1Ds II has all sorts of custom functionality I never even look at, but it didn't cause me not to buy it.morgan
Well-known
I really want the 5D, but I'm also considering the new olympus ep1 thing. I want the 5D for its high-iso capability and that it's full frame. The ep-1 for it's size and autofocus and stuff like that. You learn how to use the buttons, and it becomes second nature (although I still prefer my R-D1 and a more manual operation). But the images I see from the 5D and good glass just seem to be stunning, even at ridiculous iSO's. And since I hate flashes, it would seem to be a good way to go, other than sheer cost, which is why I don't have one already...
peripatetic
Well-known
I just upgraded from a 5D to a 5DMkII.
Short version - it's fabulous. I have a 50 f1.2L on it 90% of the time.
It's much bigger and bulkier than my ZI, but of course much smaller than a 1 series, it strikes a reasonable balance. Also if you use something like a 50 f1.4 or 28 f1.8 or 85 f1.8 on it, it's really much lighter than you might expect.
Having said that though I would highly recommend the 24-105 L "kit" lens. At f5.6 it's unbelievably sharp.
Image quality on the new 5D2 is amazing. Live view is very useful even though I thought I would hate it. The new LCD is fantastic, even though I thought I wouldn't care. The video is great fun and very convenient, even though I thought I would never use it. The AF microadjust is excellent, even though it seems to be much better calibrated out of the box than my original 5D. The viewfinder is big and bright, quite a lot better than the 5D, which is itself in a different class to smaller DSLRs. The anti-dust is useful. The resolution is almost ridiculous. And the high-ISO performance is truly spectacular, no hesitation in going all the way to 6400 which is as good as 1600 was on the 5D.
Having said all of that I'm not going to be getting rid of my ZI. Both have their place. Best quality, practicality, etc -> 5D2. Most fun to use -> ZI.
Short version - it's fabulous. I have a 50 f1.2L on it 90% of the time.
It's much bigger and bulkier than my ZI, but of course much smaller than a 1 series, it strikes a reasonable balance. Also if you use something like a 50 f1.4 or 28 f1.8 or 85 f1.8 on it, it's really much lighter than you might expect.
Having said that though I would highly recommend the 24-105 L "kit" lens. At f5.6 it's unbelievably sharp.
Image quality on the new 5D2 is amazing. Live view is very useful even though I thought I would hate it. The new LCD is fantastic, even though I thought I wouldn't care. The video is great fun and very convenient, even though I thought I would never use it. The AF microadjust is excellent, even though it seems to be much better calibrated out of the box than my original 5D. The viewfinder is big and bright, quite a lot better than the 5D, which is itself in a different class to smaller DSLRs. The anti-dust is useful. The resolution is almost ridiculous. And the high-ISO performance is truly spectacular, no hesitation in going all the way to 6400 which is as good as 1600 was on the 5D.
Having said all of that I'm not going to be getting rid of my ZI. Both have their place. Best quality, practicality, etc -> 5D2. Most fun to use -> ZI.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I'm going to rush out and buy three of them as soon as my three M bodies wear out.
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
venchka
Veteran
If you talk about the 5D, you have to also talk about the Nikon D700.
Nikon advantage: A bushel of older, cheaper Nikkor lenses.
Or buy an adapter and use the old Nikkor lenses on the Canon.
Nikon advantage: A bushel of older, cheaper Nikkor lenses.
Or buy an adapter and use the old Nikkor lenses on the Canon.
cmedin
Well-known
"My other camera is a Canon 1D Mark IIn" (with a gaggle of Canon L lenses). I still went out and bought an Ikon and some ZMs. Then an M8 and more ZMs.
What does that tell you?
That you don't shoot things that move.
Agreed on the 24-105 -- it's my primary walk-around lens for vacations and such. Beware though that the barrel distortion and vignetting is pretty severe at 24mm. Cleans up around 28, which has many wondering if Canon really didn't engineer it for 28mm and marketing demanded wider... mine's tack sharp even wide open and the IS is excellent. Smaller and ligher than the 24-70/2.8 too!
Daneinbalto
Established
I think I would enjoy the video mode. Not so much for taking clips intended to be shown in their entirety but because I think it functions like a motor drive with 30 (or is it 24) frames/min. Sounds like a great way to freeze motion when things are moving so fast that I can't otherwise reliably grab the exact frame I want. Maybe a 5D MkII user can confirm that the camera can actually be used in this fashion. Also, could a user tell me about any limitations to shutter speed and aperture in video mode?
Also I have heard that live view induces noise in the picture because the constant current going to the sensor, which heats it up, and heat causes pixel noise. Does this mean that there is more noise in video captures with the 5D Mk II than in stills?
Also I have heard that live view induces noise in the picture because the constant current going to the sensor, which heats it up, and heat causes pixel noise. Does this mean that there is more noise in video captures with the 5D Mk II than in stills?
cmedin
Well-known
The video is captured at a much lower resolution so that would more than make up for the increase in noise.
lemalk
Rebel Without Applause
Morgan - your feelings echo mine completely.
The 5DM2 offers really nice images even at ridiculous ISOs, and I have some Leica R glass that would probably be a good fit for it, apart from at least one L lens.
I had some frustrating moments shooting a few low-light concerts where a nice zoom was a *necessity* and I've been considering also adding some small video segments to some art and work-related projects I'm working on.
At $2700 for the body, it ain't ridiculously cheap - and I wonder if the new Olympus will hold me over (apart from the higher ISO limitations).
totifoto
Well-known
Refusing to buy a camera because of it having a feature you don't like is kind of silly -- it's not like it forces you to use video. I can see if it was LACKING in some area (sensor, AF, frames/second) but if it was everything you wanted and also happened to do video, why would you even care about that part?
I just don't get some people...
Well they could have upgrated the focus system rather then put some video stuff in it.
f16sunshine
Moderator
I have the original Fiver. The new model was tempting to me for one reason really. Auto Sensor cleaning. Is that strange?? The sensor in the original more than does what I need it to otherwise. I primarily use the camera for close focus Potraits and Moonlit landscapes. My RF's take 10x as many captures in a month as the DSLR. AF speed means nothing as all my lenses are adapted Zeiss Contax and M42 from Zeiss and FSU makers. In fact I even put an old Contax RTS microprism focus screen in and it is sublime for Manual focus. The 5DII is a fantastic camera. Some of what I have seen others do with it could makes it very tempting. If a person was doing a lot of landscape and color work where the high Res and DR could be of use then go for this cam. For a guy like me who converts 90% of images to B+W.....the original is a gem.
x-ray
Veteran
My primary work cameras are 1DmkII's and have had them for I guess five or six years now. I didn't go MkIII because I didn't see enough gain to justify the cost. I also have an old 20D that I use for head shots that won't reproduce more than a half page. IMO the 5DII has a better looking image. I now have a need for high quality video in my work and the 5DII would be a good fit. I have a very extensive set of L prime glass from 24 to 200 (f1.8) and a good complement of L zooms. The video quality is exceptional even compared to some very expensive broadcast cameras. For me the fit is good and the size and weight are less than I usually carry.
As to when I might buy one, possibly later this year.
As to when I might buy one, possibly later this year.
Sam N
Well-known
The 5D mkII is an incredible camera, and does what it does extremely well. What you really have to ask yourself is "do I want/need a camera with these specific strengths/weakenesses".
If you intend to use the camera at higher ISO settings, you like to make big prints, or want more options for selective DoF, get the 5D2. If not, stick with 4/3 or M43.
If you intend to use the camera at higher ISO settings, you like to make big prints, or want more options for selective DoF, get the 5D2. If not, stick with 4/3 or M43.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
The 5D2 produces very impressive high ISO results. I own a Mk1 and use a Mk2 at work, and the significantly better high ISO performance and LiveView alone sold me on it. I've got a bag full of Canon glass already and have wanted to experiment with video for a while now, but the ergnomics of the video mode on the 5D are quite poor. I think that's somewhat intentional on Canon's part so as not to cannibalize their video camera line (or get in the way of taking stills, which is what the camera's primary function is supposed to be). I'm glad that it's there and I like playing around with it, but it doesn't really "make" the camera for me like I thought it would originally. Still haven't decided to buy one for myself or not; bodies depreciate significantly, I'm still taking great images with my Mk1, and I could put that $1k+ towards some nice glass (that'll hold its value a lot better and give me more flexibility upgrading in the future).
In your shoes, I'd recommend renting one with a Canon lens or two for a week and seeing how you like it before spending thousands of dollars.
I agree with everything in this post.
In your shoes, I'd recommend renting one with a Canon lens or two for a week and seeing how you like it before spending thousands of dollars.
I agree with everything in this post.
Last edited: