Canon 5D vs. Canon 5D Mark II

[candace_miller]

<p>I'm a wedding and portrait photographer and I'm about to upgrade my equipment. I currently use a Canon 10D. So my question is, which is a better value, the 5D or the 5D Mark II? Which is easier to use, what are the pros. and cons. of each, is the Mark II compatible with all canon lenses and flashes, ect.? </p>

[daniel_browning]

<p>Although I love my 5D2, I'd argue that the 5D1 is a better value if you can find one for close to $1000.<br>

The Mark II is compatible with all the same lenses and flashes as the 5D1.<br>

I'd say that the Mark II is easier to use.<br>

5D2 pros/cons:</p>

<ul>

<li>High price</li>

<li>High Resolution</li>

<li>Improved read noise </li>

<li>Live view (especially useful on a tripod) </li>

<li>Video without adding another 5 pounds of kit.</li>

<li>Nice LCD</li>

<li>Good image magnification (for focus checking)</li>

<li>Silent mode 2 has no mirror slap and no 1st curtain shutter slap.</li>

<li>Dust resistance</li>

</ul>

<p>5D1 pros/cons:</p>

<ul>

<li>Low price</li>

<li>Resolution that may be "good enough" for most purposes.</li>

<li>Small LCD and low image magnification makes image review more difficult.</li>

</ul>

<p>Those are just the comparisons that come to mind. I'm sure that many more and other differences will become apparent if you read the 5D2 reviews, such as this one:<br>

<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-DSLR-Digital-Camera-Review.aspx">http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-DSLR-Digital-Camera-Review.aspx</a></p>

[savas_kyprianides]

<p>Your choice whether 25 meg files are a pro or a con.</p>

[alan_cox3]

<p>If you're currently using your lenses with a 10D, then even though they are "compatible" with a 5D2 the results might look no better than you're getting now. It will depend on the quality of the lenses. So you need to decide how much real resolution and image quality you need to do the job. Then add in the price of any lens upgrades (if necessary) to take advantage of the body you're considering. (You might need to spend an extra $2K to take advantage of that 5D2.)</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>Hi Candace,</p>

<p>Either camera will be a huge upgrade from the 10D. I have never used a 5D but I do have the 5D2. You will not need the best glass to see a huge improvement compared to your 10D. Although the 5D2 is 21 megapixels, it's pixels are large (20D size) so if a lens is good enough for a 20D then it is good enough for the 5D2. I do have good lenses but I also use cheap lenses like the 50mm f1.8 and the Vivitar 100mm f3.5. The results are outstanding.</p>

[paul_runnoe2]

<p>I'll give a stab and say the better value for straight portraits, and not needing to make 30"+ canvases the 5D will be a much better value.<br>

Now, for me, I want the option of taking video for family footage and want the luxury of not packing around a separate video camera and all the support batteries, cards, tapes and dongles it entails. Sure you can get a nice video camera for less than $1000-1500 easily but being the only 'photo-video' guy in the house you can do both, but not at the same time, until now.<br>

Frankly I'd be happy with a 5DII that shot 12MB Raw and had HD video capability. (for a cheaper price please!)</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I've shot with a 5D for 3 years and am still amazed at the IQ. And if IQ is all you care about, the 5D has it in spades. However if I was buying now, I'd spring for the 5DII. Why? The friggen LCD is light-years ahead, having ISO constantly in the VF is freakin' awesome and the menu system is nicer (divided into several smaller subject grouped menus instead of one huge one). Plus, the 5D RAM buffer chokes quickly if you shoot RAW.</p>

<p>But, yeah, the 5D is a mean lean picture taking machine compared to the 10D. AF and flash metering tower above it. And it turns on instantly...</p>

[markonestudios]

I was in this dilemma even before they announced the 5DII. I had set my mind on the 5D1 and was preparing to buy it. I tested one and I loved it. Compared to my humble XTi, well, there was not much to compare ;-) After the 5D2 was announced though, I had to revisit my plan. I don't care for video, but it has a superb feature set and would mean I'm not going to have to invest in another body for several years to come. I tested one and I'm now convinced.

<p>The 5D1 is still a superb camera, and in the right hands a marvellous tool. For me I just need something that can 'future-proof' me for a while to come as far as bodies are concerned, so it'll be the 5D2. If you can afford it, by all means, get the 5D2. It has two sRAW modes which reduce the file sizes (if that's an issue for you) of your RAW captures. I shoot JPEG (gasp!)

[elliot1]

<p>Since you are someone that earns a living using your camera, it is easy to recommend the Mark II to you. While the two cameras both take excellent and deliver virtually identical IQ, there are many reasons for investing in the Mark II over the 5D.</p>

<p>The monitor is virtually useless on the 5D. The monitor on the Mark II is superb (perhaps the BEST available on any camera, IMO). Aside from improved and accurate color and sharpness, it brightens outdoors (so you can actually see it) and darkens indoors automatically. As a wedding photographer, this reason alone is enough to justify the purchase of the Mark II.</p>

<p>I find white balance and flash performance vastly improved as well with the Mark II. Again, excellent reasons (especially the flash performance) to invest in the newer camera.</p>

<p>The Mark II will make your work day easier and more enjoyable.</p>

<p> </p>

[matt_needham]

<p>I'd say it's a question of budget. If the extra $1000 saved goes towards better lenses and flashes, and the newer features of the mkII don't make much difference to you, then the 5D mkI is the way to go. If money is no object and you don't also need new flashes and lenses then the mkII is the choice. I'll be buying a second mkI, because I'd much rather spend the extra $1000 on lighting.</p>

<p> </p>

[alberto greco]

<blockquote>

"I've shot with a 5D for 3 years and am still amazed at the IQ. And if IQ is all you care about, the 5D has it in spades. However if I was buying now, I'd spring for the 5DII. Why? The friggen LCD is light-years ahead, having ISO constantly in the VF is freakin' awesome and the menu system is nicer (divided into several smaller subject grouped menus instead of one huge one). Plus, the 5D RAM buffer chokes quickly if you shoot RAW"

</blockquote>

 

I quote Puppy Face.

 

Having bought the 5DII for my daddy's 60th BD and therefore having played a lot with it, I can also add that the new release has the live view, which is absolutely useful if you prefer to manual focusing in certain type of shots (e.g. landscape and also studio portraits).

 

Having said that, I currently have the 5D and won't upgrade. For the stuff i really need (IQ, FF and high ISO capability), I am perfectly satisfied with the first release. The other attractive - but not essential - features of the 5DII, IMO, are not worth spending the money for the upgrade.

 

of course if money is not an issue , my above consideration is immediately superseded.

 

 

Cheers

 

Alberto

[pgranone]

<p>I had the cash for a 5D mark II. But decided to buy a "like new" 5D instead. <br>

The original 5D has great IQ, and is a good used bargain these days. <br />I use two 5D bodies and both perform quite well in real world situations. <br /><br />I will wait for improved focusing in the 5D mark III or another full framer. </p>

 

[joshroot]

<p>For me personally, the only things that the 5D MkII has over the first version is the video capibility and the high ISO performance. Now, for me, those are more than enough to make the switch. I have a small child and am constantly carrying around two devices so I can film and photograph. I'm also frequently shooting photos in all sorts of dark environments and am in love with the high ISO that the MkII gives. I'm going to be bummed when Canon makes me send back the loaner that is sitting here and I have to go through the bother of selling my original 5D and buying a new one.</p>

[kenneth betts]

<p>I just went from the 10D to the 5D2 myself and can say that I have not regretted the move; its like coming out of the dark ages (although the mirror slap seems louder to me on the 5D2). Back when the 5D came out I strongly considered upgrading, but decided to wait for the next generation. Now that it is out, the only thing I'll warn you against is that you'll need to buy a bigger hard drive! Mine is filling up fast with the 25+MB RAW files.</p>

[candace_miller]

<p>Thanks for all the responses! </p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Also, the latest version of DPP is much, much more computer intesive. Depending on your system, you may NEED to upgrade (for example, converting 400+ Raws on my laptop used to run in the background for an hour or so, this last time time it took over seven hours... ...ouch!)</p>

[richard_wang11]

<p>I've used or have in my battery 1DS, 1DS MKII and 5D.<br>

<br /> To replace the 1DS MKII, I tested the 5D MkII, 1DS MKIII and a Phase One P30 digital back for a RZ67.<br>

<br /> The 5D MKII is a great camera. As a friend of mine said, "The images it produces makes you look like a better photographer." It is certainly worth the additional money over the 5D. The images produced are almost as good as the 1DS MKIII but it didn't compare to the digital back.<br>

<br /> Though it's an exceptional camera I didn't really consider the 5D MKII. When you show up with pro-sumer equipment, there is a tendency for the client to say "I can do that. I have the same camera." or worse "Uncle Bob's got the same camera, let him take the pictures."<br /> <br /> Yes, Yes I know it's not about the equipment, it's about the photos about the skill of the photographer. But remember this is a business and your success depends often on the image you project. And sometimes being taken seriously as a professional means having a big camera.</p>

<p> </p>

[randyhargraves]

<p>If you can justify the expense then the Mk II is the way to go. The files I've seen from it will make you want to slap your momma. As a wedding photographer you could realistically need to higher ISO capability and video function. Plus you can print larger with the higher resolution. </p>

[RickDB]

<p>One other consideration - the self-cleaning sensor on the 5D2 is a boon - but if you are comfortable cleaning your sensor, and don't mind doing it regularly, this may not be an issue.</p>

[david choo]

<p>Ask yourself these questions....<br>

In terms of your workflow, which is better?<br>

Do you shoot raw or jpeg?<br>

Do you need higher ISO?<br>

If I was a wedding photographer I would probably shoot JPEG only for the sake of workflow and storage... allowing me to shoot higher resolutions... RAW is just not possible at 1000+ shots a day.... unless you're making $10K a wedding and don't care about storage... but then if you did make that you'd probably have 3-4 5d Mk IIs... sorry tangent...<br>

I'd probably want the highest ISO ability possible... I've shot a few weddings in my life before I became a commercial guy... and there just never seems to be enough usable light.<br>

5D Mk II has that cool dust vibrating gizmo that eliminates most dust every time you turn off the camera... that alone is worth thousands... and many hours in post.<br>

As for pure resolution... I really don't think 99.9% of clients have any real understanding of the difference between a photo shot on a 13 megapixel camera and a 21 megapixel camera... seriously even blown up 30x40... most simply aren't knowledgeable enough... and as the person being shot... I don't really know that I want to be able to see every pore on my face...<br>

And let's not get into the fact that most lenses won't resolve 21 megapixels too well... and if are using lenses that can... it doesn't matter... you're shooting handheld, you're never gonna use all 21 megapixels....<br>

So my point... don't look at it in terms of megapixels (not that you were, but a lot of people do as if megapixels will change their life) look at workflow, ISO, focus speed and ability...<br>

Hmm I just realized why a lot of wedding photographers have moved to the Nikon D3... and D700... lol... sorry.</p>

[William Michael]

<p >My perspective is business: your question implies you have <strong><em>only</em></strong> a 10D and you shoot Weddings, professionally. So do I, (shoot Weddings professionally, that is). The 5D is a very suitable business tool. As you are considering a 5D MkII, then I assume you have that capital allocated to new camera body(ies). If my assumptions are correct, then I would buy a 5D and a 40D (or 50D) new.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The logic is twofold: firstly you get a <strong ><em >new, second working camera</em></strong>, which is far superior to the 10D, and thus you can exploit all the advantages of a dual format system. Secondly you still have a valuable backup camera, your 10D.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Alternatively, buying only the 5D, allocates the extra capital to other equipment, and if you keep the 10D you can still exploit the benefits of a dual format system if you keep that camera as a working + back up. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >The value-adds contained in 5DmkII certainly make it an attractive (personal use) camera, I do not argue that fact: and it will be an excellent W&P Camera too: I am simply making the point, that a 5D is the better business decision given the frame of your question. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >On another point, I have only scan read the other answers but I do not think that batteries have been mentioned - the 10D, I believe uses a BP-511, I think you will find the 5D (and the 40D & 50D) use the same battery, but I think the 5D MkII does not – maybe a small consideration to some, but not for me when running two cameras on a job – that info is from memory, you should confirm my comment if you consider the point relevant to you. </p>

<p ></p>

<p >***</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong><em>"is the Mark II compatible with all canon lenses"</em></strong></p>

<p ><strong><em> </em></strong></p>

<p >No. The 5DMkII is only compatible with the EF (and TS-E and MP-E) lenses: my point being the 5DMkII is not compatible with the EF-S lenses, but neither are the 5D and 10D compatible with the EF-S range of lenses. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >***</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I liked the comment about ensuring we arrive with a bigger camera, like a 1 Series, to shoot a Wedding. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >For my Digital Wedding Kit, I run a 20D + 5D with a 30D as my back up. All have Battery Grips, and 580's attached, so I guess that makes them bigger? </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I usually always carry two cameras, consistently, so that might intimidate some of the macho thinking by Uncle Bob with a 5D at his eyeball. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >If we want to the nitty-gritty we can always match up what L lenses we each have. I could then trump with the two 645's both with power winders which I often use for the for the formals – the three head Elinchrom kit mostly stays in the car . . . I only bring it out if it is a “Take no Prisoners” style of function. . . actually for that type of gig I "instruct" my Assistant to run and get the lighting for me . . . and perhaps coffee and donuts too . . . </p>

<p > </p>

<p >There is a bit more too it, than whose got the biggest camera: the first step is usually to let Uncle Bob think he has won the game, that way he is usually he is out of your hair for the whole night: but we all do business differently – that is part of the fun of it. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

 

[patrick_f]

<p>Good posts here! I am saving/waiting until they work out the inevitable Canon bugs to pick up the MKII. I have printed 30x40's from my 5D and they look amazing. I can only imagine MKII files. It is unfortunate, but what Richard Wang said is true - especially in the commercial world. I refuse to sell my 503CW because I love to pitch it to clients with the rental of a digital back. Compared to any DSLR, it is a dream to use!</p>

[tim_price2]

<p>Personally, the most important equipment choice you can make is to have reliable backups for your gear. Nothing against the 10D, but at this point you also have to expect that the shutter or other components are going to fail. The 5dm2 might have some great features, but youd probably be far better served by a pair of new bodies rather than a single new one with 10d as backup/alternate.<br>

As mentioned, the 5d is a great camera and a big step up from your 10D. I'd have to agree that a 5d classic along with 40d makes a pretty good duo. With long glass like the 70-200 on the 40d and something wide like the 24-70 on the 5d you're covered for almost anything. I've got almost the same kit, and it really works well</p>

[bobsimsphoto]

<p>Hi Candace,<br>

I shoot weddings and events. I currently shoot with a 5D, 40D, and a 20D. It all depends how much you want to spend. I purchased my 5D back in 2005 and it has been a great camera for me. I shoot completely in RAW and the quality I get with the 5D with L glass is fantastic. So, I'd say the better "bargain" would be the 5D.<br>

Hope that helps!<br>

Bob</p>