M8 IQ vs 5D

johnastovall said:
Why do people seem obsessed with comparing avocados and aardvarks?

While we are doing this pointless comparison, let's compare the 5D with an 8x10 Deardorf.
Click to expand...

Maybe, perhaps, because it all tastes like chicken, and it's always a mystery why apples are such crunchy chickens where oranges are very pulpous chickens.
 
HenningW said:
Snipped

In very low light the Leica is still hard to beat. AF on the 5D and 5DII is not that great in very dark conditions, and I get way more keepers with the Leica, and as I mentioned before the Leica files respond nicely to boosting exposure in LR or PS.


snipped

Henning
Click to expand...

I find the 5D AF (center point) is very good in very dark conditions with the Canon 50mm F/1.0 lens.
 
johnastovall said:
I find the 5D AF (center point) is very good in very dark conditions with the Canon 50mm F/1.0 lens.
Click to expand...

I don't have the Canon f/1, but the 50/1.2 doesn't do that well. I can certainly focus the Leica (irrespective of lens, of course) better in very dark conditions. i know this is somewhat subjective as some people are not as comfortable with rangefinders, but the 5D and 5DII have focussing limitations.

Henning
 
I use the 5D's centre focus exclusively and have no probs. With the 50/1.2 I've shot in very dark conditions without probs. Where I was getting blur - i tend to put it down to the shallow DOF/my skills.


Here's a few taken using the 5D + 50/1.2 @ f1.2

2998627011_e0baab38ae.jpg


2223701231_e51b6ab6af.jpg


Not sure what f stop on this one...

2145098300_865c60cfa4.jpg
 
My 50/1.2 focuses on 5D almost instantly in any situation (of course I'm using only one focus point, same as M8;-) and sharp wide open, actually I like it focused manually too, really great lens.
 
boy_lah said:
I use the 5D's centre focus exclusively and have no probs. With the 50/1.2 I've shot in very dark conditions without probs. Where I was getting blur - i tend to put it down to the shallow DOF/my skills.


Here's a few taken using the 5D + 50/1.2 @ f1.2
Click to expand...

I was talking about dark conditions. 1600 ISO, 1/4 sec at f/1, for example. These are bright. The Canon does well in bright conditions. I only use the center focus point.

Very nice pictures, BTW.

Henning
 
Last edited:
I was talking about dark conditions.....These are bright. The Canon does well in bright conditions. I only use the center focus point.
Click to expand...

Other than the daylight shot, how can you tell what the conditions were in those pics? And in practical terms, focusing in the near dark is a crapshoot with either a rangefinder or a modern SLR. Both the Leica M and the Canon 5D require a 'compose-focus-recompose-shoot' dance that ensures a less-than-ideal hit rate in those conditions.

1600 ISO, 1/4 sec at f/1, for example.
Click to expand...

Shooting at these settings is a complete roll of the dice no matter what camera you're using. Someone trying to consistently produce results that were other than impressionistic would change at least one of those settings.
 
HenningW said:
I was talking about dark conditions. 1600 ISO, 1/4 sec at f/1, for example. These are bright. The Canon does well in bright conditions. I only use the center focus point.

Very nice pictures, BTW.

Henning
Click to expand...

Henning - I'm afraid you're making some incorrect assumptions here. The first pix (lady in mask) was at an indoors party - with very very little light - the shot is actually taken using iso3200 @ f1.2 probably around 1/40-50.

The second pix was a typical dreary UK winter day - so not 'dark' as such but not a lot of light either. Taken in front of a window using iso1600 (from memory).

The final fog shot is probably the 'brightest' but it was a grey winter's day which was more like late evening than 'day time' light - from memory probably iso800.

kevin m said:
Shooting at these settings (~1/10) is a complete roll of the dice no matter what camera you're using. Someone trying to consistently produce results that were other than impressionistic would change at least one of those settings.
Click to expand...

Agreed. On the M (without a mirror) I can comfortably do 1/15. On a d-slr, I struggle even with 1/50. I prefer a 'safe' 1/80 especially given the 'faster' pace when I shoot with a slr at events.



best,
Clinton
 
Last edited:
5D vs M8

5D vs M8

kevin m said:
I'm not a pixel-peeper. The M8 and the 5D seemed roughly equal to me in IQ, except that the 5D is less noisy at any iso above 800. Ergonomics and handling are much more important to me, and in that regard, the 5D flatly trumps the M8. The M8 with a compact lens makes for a tidy package, but that's the only advantage it has. All the access to functions that is necessary with a digital camera is easy with the 5D and a PITA with the M8.

I, for one, hope the M9 doesn't look like an M3.
Click to expand...

Had the 5D before selling and getting a used but mint 1d2.

The M8 is advantageous in size and weight and at ISO 160, where the Dynamic range beats the 5D. If I travel, without a doubt, it would now be the M8. The 1d2 setup and 24-70L is crazy, especially if you bring along 1 to 4 year old kids. The 5D being slightly but not any better with the 24-70L.

Weight is a tremendous transportability issue. It is an issue between bringing a cam or not. So, the advantage of the M8 in size and shooting files way better than digicams within ISO 640 is still there.

The M8 and my first lens, the 28'cron would make a great point and shoot. Am adding a 50mm but getting a mint 50 cron v2 rigid serial no. 214xxxx is a toss up with the new summicron.
 
kevin m said:
True. But a 5D with a prime mounted isn't that much bigger than an M.
Click to expand...


much thicker i would say and I prefer the 5d w/ grip which adds quite some weight.
Both cameras are great and I have seen outstanding pictures from both (probably more from 5d since more people own them and use them extensively).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom