To buy a 5D (no mkII) in 2010: still worth it?

[jack_lord1]

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>a mere ten days ago i posted the same question regarding a D300, having in mind to buy it. But, after guessing a while, i started to think about that old 5D which sells for about the same price as a used Nikon D300.<br /> Anyone of you Canon-hards ;) think it could be still an effective camera given the fact it is 5 years old? I mean, does it deserve to be bought in 2010 over a D300?</p>

<p>Thank you!</p>

[danielleetaylor]

<p>The 5D takes the same beautiful photographs that it did 5 years ago. As a testament to the quality of its sensor at the time, it is still competitive in terms of image quality with current bodies, both APS-C and 12 MP FF like the Nikon D700.</p>

<p>You have to decide whether it has the features you want at the price you want. Both the 7D and D300s have more features and comparable IQ, better in fact with the 7D, but they're also more expensive new than the 5D is used. Something like a used 40D will give you comparable IQ, better feature set, and a lower used price. A new 50D is (I think) about the same price as a used 5D, again with a better feature set.</p>

<p>You also need to decide FF vs APS-C. APS-C is more cost effective, but there are some lenses that work best on FF (such as T/S lenses).</p>

<p>I'm a Canon owner and prefer their system for the lenses they offer, but that's another decision that only you can make: Canon vs Nikon.</p>

<p>You'll probably get more effective advice by posting more specifics about your budget and what you want to shoot.</p>

[shambrick007]

<p>For what I do, yes. The only reason I went to a 5DII was because it was a gift. No complaints on the Mk II....it's just that the 5D (w/my 50D for back-up/sports) was all that I needed.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>I use both the 5D and the 7D. When I need to grab a camera for anything but action photography - it is ALWAYS the 5D. The Image Quality is still better than the 7D - the files just look much cleaner and the colors pop, plus, it really acts like a true 35mm camera which is important to my landscape work.</p>

<p>The fact is that the 5D prices are a bargain these days for the quality you get - go for it!</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>I have a 5D2 but I keep my 5D around as a back-up. The 5D is a fine camera and can produce really excellent photograph. If money isn't an issue the features of the 5D2 are certainly worth the additional cost, but if money <em>is</em> an issue and you feel that having a full frame sensor is very important to you then a 5D can be a great option.</p>

[peter_j2]

<p>Yes. As long as you can find a used 5D with proof that it went through the recent Canon recall fix of the mirror assembly.</p>

[bill_dewberry]

<p>No need for proof of the mirror fix; if it did not, canon will do it now no charge.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>You can look at the mirror and see the added retainers. If not, Canon fixes it free.</p>

<p>I have to agree, 5D IQ is still amazing even in 2010, 5 years out from its debut. You may miss certain features if you've used a modern EOS like a 50D or 7D: no ISO in VF (unless you press a button), no LV, slow formats, one huge menu (no tabs) and the worse LCD ever. My 5D LCD was so dim I could barely see the histogram in the shade...</p>

[jack_lord1]

<p>Thank you all for the useful infos!</p>

<p>The main reason why the idea to buy a 5D started growing on me, other the price equivalence between D300/5D, was i wanted to go back to prime lenses. Especially the Canon 28 1.8 really got my attention, while Nikon can't offer such a versatile glass for the price.<br>

<br /> Honestly the only thing that makes me think is the D300 has got one hell of a color range and a waterproof body. As far as technology is concerned, the 5D may be outdated but as a matter of fact i see some of the pro photojournalists are still using it.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>yes its still worth it. Although we now have a 7D with 18MP and dual Digic 4 processors that is capable of large printing , there is no substitute for a full frame sensor. It will make beautiul images that can be printed large, there are more wide angle options, and it uses more of the image circle to create better bokeh. It also utilizes larger individual pixels to gather more light and handle noise very well. Although its several years old, it is still a very worthy camera and there's a reason they sell consistently for over $1000 on ebay.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Colour range/rendering is more affected by lenses than DSLRs and differences can be corrected anyway. NO DSLR is "waterproof"!</p>

<p>If you want a crop body for sports then the D300 is very good. If you want a full frame for landscapes/architecture then the 5D is in fact still very capable and a far better value than any used Nikon full frame.</p>

<p>I use a full frame and a crop body for different situations so you really have to decide which is more important for you.</p>

[manuel barrera houston,]

<p>It depends on the photographer as to whether a 5 year old Canon 5D can be effective. In the hands of a good photographer it could make a living for him or her. My 2 cents</p>

[adam_bliss]

<p>I still shoot with the 5D and it's a great camera. I have a few things I would have loved to add to it like an automatic dust cleaning sensor but with a little TLC it works just as good today as it did 5 years ago and 12MP still prints great large photos.<br>

Adam</p>

[buffdr_rasouliyan]

<p>I love my 5D. Until the mark II came out, I would say it was the best DSLR. Still, 5 years later, kicks most cameras. I had 2 of them, I sold one and got a 7D. Now I'm buying the mark II. Make no mistake, 7D is a great camera too but it aint no 5D. Final answer, YES. v/r Buffdr</p>

[ben_goren]

<p>Jack,</p>

 

<p>In terms of sheer image quality, the original 5D still beats any APS-C camera ever made.</p>

 

<p>Except for the viewfinder, pretty much any APS-C camera on the market today will generally be

significantly better than the 5D in almost any other non-image-quality metric you’d care to

name.</p>

 

<p>And any APS-C camera on the market will make outstanding 13″ × 19″ prints

with ease, practically indistinguishable from those from a 5D. (Get much bigger and the 5D starts to pull

away, fast.)</p>

 

<p>That should be enough for you to make an informed decision.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>I got my 5D a few years back, still working great. I miss built-in flash, which while not the greatest, is <em>very</em> handy to have. The lack of auto-sensor cleaning (likely not perfect, but I'm sure it helps) and live view are negatives, if you're debating between I and II. Other than that, a very nice full frame camera. Reminds me of the first 4 cylinder bike Honda came out with: a milestone.</p>

[jack_lord1]

<p>These are some great suggestions.</p>

<p>Uh, excuse me for "waterproof" i intended tropicalized body ;) even if, to say the truth, years ago i had a D70 under heavy rain for a day and it didn't care at all ;)<br /> The comments are overall enthusiastic but what about using it for photojournalism and such? I see the landscape/architecture gets more than a handful of suggestions as the 5D's field.<br>

<br /> Is it too "slow" for it to be handy for photoj? Ken Rockwell says that but i don't take anything by that guy as truth revealed ;)<br /> Thanks!</p>

[alan_ginman]

<p>"Is it too "slow" for it to be handy for photoj? " Someone asked a similar question on this forum a few weeks ago and someone responded by posting picturers of surfers and other very active subjects in full flight that had been taken with a 5D. Given that people used to use TLR Rolleiflexes for PJ work, using a 5D should be a walk in the park.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Alan</p>

[hjoseph7]

"Yes. As long as you can find a used 5D with proof that it went through the recent Canon recall fix of the mirror assembly."

 

Wow, I'm just fnding about this ?

[dipeshl]

<p>I too am very happy with my 5D mark I. i bought it used in Sept 09 and the IQ is great. Unless you have use for the video, I would go Mark I instead of Mark II. Splurge on some good quality glass with the money you save buying a Mark I...you won't regret it!<br>

'to say the truth, years ago i had a D70...."<br>

Jack, Do you have Nikon Lens or Canon lens? </p>

[peter_j2]

<p><strong>Harry Joseph:</strong> Notice was mailed to registered owners over a year ago.</p>

<p>See here:<strong> </strong><br /><strong></strong><br /><strong><a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=215&modelid=11933&keycode=2112&id=55659">http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&fcategoryid=215&modelid=11933&keycode=2112&id=55659</a></strong></p>

[danielleetaylor]

<p><em>In terms of sheer image quality, the original 5D still beats any APS-C camera ever made.</em></p>

<p>The 7D out resolves the 5D and has less noise at equal magnification. The 5D will be sharper out of camera, but the 7D will match it with very little sharpening. The 7D also has greater dynamic range by over a stop. The 7D is closer to the 5D mkII in terms of fine detail and overall IQ than it is to the 5D.</p>

<p>You can verify all of this at respected sites like DPReview and Imaging Resource. IR in particular has plenty of test shots you can download and print. DPReview has all kinds of numbers for comparison.</p>

<p>Why the opposite opinions? 1) People pixel peep and therefore misjudge noise. 2) People apply equal amounts of USM to full frame and APS-C when APS-C takes a bit more. 3) People assume color/contrast/saturation/sharpness settings are the same body to body when they are not. (Color, contrast, and saturation are entirely under the photographer's control. For that reason I cannot help but laugh when someone says a body has better color.)</p>

<p>The 5D is a great camera, still quite capable of high quality, commercial work. But I can only take so much of the "full frame is always better" meme.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I quite agree on the idea that a 35mm sensor isn't always better than a APS-C sensor. It depends on a lot of things, not least the <em>generation</em> to which a particular sensor belongs.<br>

I bought a lightly used, but early, 5D and it is really my favorite camera these days, but I still shoot a lot of APS-C as well. Sometimes that extra reach for the telephotos can be compelling.</p>

<p>As for Nikon vs. Canon versions, you're on your own there. Too much heat, too little light.</p>

[diego_di_michele]

<p>I own 5D, (and have owned 5D mkII). Talking purely about photography, 5D is an extremely good camera, I think it is still one of the best cameras around. You should go for it.</p>