Canon 5D vs 5D Mk II - Thoughts and knowledge please

[lmwalker]

<p>As a current 5D owner I can't justify upgrading, but I think if I did not already own a 5D, I would almost certainly go for the 5DII.</p>

[nicholas_baker]

<p>+1 on the 5d2 if you have some decent glass to go with it. I love mine. Seriously. I love it. The screen alone is worth the money. Not to mention the amazing quality of the photos off this sensor.... Buy a grip too. :)</p>

<p>If you don't have good glass....Get a 5d and a nice L lens.</p>

[thomas_hardy1]

<blockquote>

<p>Hope you find this helpful. I went to Best buy. I told them I wanted to buy the 5D Mk II (Body only for $2699.99) but that I was going to wait until they mail those 12% discount coupons they mail regulary. They guy went to the manager and later they approved a 10% discount. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha, that's pretty slick. I have to remember that one!</p>

[dogbert]

<p>I went for the 5D. While I could afford the Mark II I really couldn't justify sinking so much money into something that will depreciate by half in only a few years, for such little difference in final print quality.</p>

[psoriano]

<p>I bought a 5D kit (with 24-105) last Saturday (my birthday) for 1999 euros. As the price of 24-105 L alone is about 1000 euros, I thought it was a good deal.<br>

After my little experience trying it with 50 f/1.4, 28-105 f/3.5-,24-105L, 85 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, Sigma 70-300 Super APO, Tokina 100-300 f/4<br>

- I find DOF notably thinner<br>

- I find noise at 3200 ISO (H) not only moderate but easily correctable<br>

- It seems to be (as the pixel size is larger) less exigent with the lenses than my previous 8 Mp APS-C. Even the Tokina (great until 200) looks fine at 300 f/4!<br>

- I can't find any vignetting. </p>

 

[psoriano]

<p>I bought a 5D kit (with 24-105) last Saturday (my birthday) for 1999 euros. As the price of 24-105 L alone is about 1000 euros, I thought it was a good deal.<br>

After my little experience trying it with 50 f/1.4, 28-105 f/3.5-,24-105L, 85 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, Sigma 70-300 Super APO, Tokina 100-300 f/4<br>

- I find DOF notably thinner<br>

- I find noise at 3200 ISO (H) not only moderate but easily correctable<br>

- It seems to be (as the pixel size is larger) less exigent with the lenses than my previous 8 Mp APS-C. Even the Tokina (great until 200) looks fine at 300 f/4!<br>

- I can't find any vignetting. </p>

 

[lucas_jarvis]

<p>I've been using the 5D for three years, and just upgraded to the 5DII and I am not impresses by the image quality upgrade. Everytime I've upgraded in the past I've always had a HUGE jump in image quality, but the 5DII was more of a feature upgrade. The sensor I think is overkill with 21 megapixels and I would only see the difference with studio work or tripod mounted photos. Comparing Raws I found only a small increase in noise performance. It's definitely an improved camera with features that are welcome, but the price difference I don't think makes it justified. If money really is an issue, and image quality is your numero uno, then go for the 5D, because it only gets beat by a small margin when you look at the prints.</p>