5D Mark II ... is it just me?

[tommykellner]

<p>... or does the Mark II feel somewhat "plasticy"?<br /><br />As usual and due to the fact that I rarely buy equipment at or shortly after release, I'm way behind the drag curve with this. Also, I look after glass and gear extremely well and thus work with a given model for a long time. I have only sold the original 5D recently and received the Mark II last night. So far I have not taken any pictures nor even inserted the battery. I only unpacked it and gave it some "feel", open battery door, etc. It feels "plasticy" or somehow "light and hollow" ... I'm not sure, whether I am making myself clear here. What I'm asking, not being able to compare side by side: "Was the original 5D of a more solid build?"<br /><br />That said, having enjoyed the original 5D tremendously, to some extend a revelation following years with the D60 and others in between, I'm expecting great things from the Mark II.<br /><br />So long<br /><br />Tommy</p>

[donald_weston1]

<p>I have had both the 5D1 and 5D2 and consider them nor any other Canon dslr as plasticky. One does not expect a 5D series camera to be a cinder block like a 1D but they are solid enough. I don't try to mishandle any of my gear, but don't coddle them either. I don't expect them to drop 6ft to the pavement and come out unscathed, while a 1D series might survive, not so sure about that either, I bet depending on how it landed it or a D3 might suffer a catastrophic failure also. For that kind of trauma, you would be better with an old film slr like a F2 or F3 or Canon F1. I would not expect any modern electronic device to survive that kind of fall or worse, but that is just me. Less then that, I have not had one failure withe even my Xsi type bodies, rain or shine....jmho....<br>

anyway, never had a problem with any cf/battery doors ever and do not mind not having an extra catch to keep them shut, they work fine as is. Obviously if you are shooting in a desert or near ocean, normal common sense should prevail. IN extreme conditions, different equipment might be better....best, Don</p>

<p>Don</p>

[john_a5]

<p>"light and hollow" Sounds about right, now put in the battery!</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>It is just you. I have both and they "feel" quite similar.</p>

[alan_bessler]

<p>I had a Canon 1Ds and a Canon 1D MKIIn,I borrowed a friends 5D2, sold them both to buy a 5D2,I'll never look back.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>It could be they used a different type of plastic to keep the weight down.</p>

[Ian Taylor]

<p>It's tough. I just beat one up for a couple of months in<a href="http://iantaylor.carbonmade.com/projects/2581492"> rural Bangladesh</a> and it came out looking like it went in.</p>

 

[chris_clarke3]

<p>I'm still not a fan of the CF door creak but I find the 5D2 solid enough for my needs.</p>

[thomas_sullivan]

<p>The body is made of magnesium alloy...only the base and sides are plastic....on both the original and the MKii. As far as the CF door....mine, the original, doesn't creak and I've never had the feeling it was flimsy. The CF door could be better, but it's far from junky. In my opinion.</p>

<p>The Rebels ARE all plastic, however. Not that, that makes them junk...I'd probably own one also if they weren't too small for my hands...ie. doesn't feel right in my hands....size wise. Just saying, that they are plastic.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[The Rebels ARE all plastic]]</p>

<p>Just for the sake of clarity, the above is not true. </p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos550d/page3.asp</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The 550D inherits the 450D and 500D's body and construction, and other than the surface finish and minor tweaks to the casing, it stays essentially the same. As such, it's primarily made from three materials; a stainless steel chassis, the mirror box which is made of high-strength 'engineering plastic' and the body made of a special lightweight polycarbonate resin with glass fiber,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Last time I checked, steel != plastic. But hey, modern science has done some amazing things, maybe I missed a change! :)</p>

 

[jeffrey_c1]

<p>You might have gotten an imported model of the 5DII with a plastic body.</p>

<p>OK. With all jokes aside, put the battery in and also a lens on the body. Report back after then.</p>

[heri_rakotomalala]

<p>I dropped mine with the 24-70mm f2.8L lens. It was about 3 or 4 foot drop on very hard floor. Not a scratch, works no problem. Was surprised due to the weight of the 24-70mm. <br>

So plastic or not plastic, it's superb engineering. If plastic saved my camera, then hail the plastic.</p>

[tommykellner]

... May I substitute "light and hollow" with "flimsy" ... For the lack of a better word?

[dan_south]

Yes, it feels a bit fragile especially when I compare it to my very rugged D700. I had to stop carrying the 5D mark 2

around by the grip because I felt the card door bending in my hand.

[Brad_]

Not fragile or plasticky at all based on lots of experience.

 

Will you be shooting in Kandahar or something?

[tommykellner]

Nope, Namib Desert mainly ... Looking forward to a clean sensor ...

[thomas_sullivan]

<p>@ Rob....well, the BODY, which is what i was plainly referring to, of the Rebels are all plastic. I did not say anthing about chassis's</p>

<p>Using the same website, for consistency of terminology....."...As you can see from the first image below the body is made up of three pieces of magnesium alloy, the only plastic elements being the sides and the base..."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page5.asp">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page5.asp</a></p>

<p> </p>

[PuppyDigs]

Both the 5D and 5DII are constructed with a magnesium body shell, so they are hollow by design. I thought they felt

similar in the hand but my impression is the newer 5 is slightly beefier and tighter feeling.

 

My old FM3A feels more like a metallic brick and I can't see that as a positive attribute.

 

I've never been able to get the CF door to squeak. You guys must have really strong hands.

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>... or does the Mark II feel somewhat "plasticy"?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, Tommy, it sure doesn't feel like the 1Ds II I had to sell in order to buy it, but you can't argue with the image quality.</p>

<p>Actually, that polycarbonate is pretty tough stuff, and it is molded over a metal frame, after all.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[mattb1]

<p>No offense, but its you. It sounds like you need to take the camera out and take some photos and become familar with it. I'm sure it will seem better once you get use to having a new camera. </p>

[triciakennedy]

<p>The 5DMkII weighs exactly the same as the MkI. I enjoyed my 5DMkI but the MkII is a huge improvement in resolution and image quality. Plasticky? I don't know what else you would expect in this day and age. But to get such great images (and video!) at such a competitive price is all that I would want. If it feels 'plasticky' then I truly don't care - it is, after all, only one of the tools in a photographer's arsenal. I'm not bothered about the nuts and bolts of how it is made - only the end result matters. May I respectfully suggest that you attach a decent lens to your great new camera and get out there and make some images? I think you might not care what it feels like once you see the results. You say that you are expecting great things from your new camera - I am confident that you will not be disappointed.</p>

 

[philip_sutton]

<p>I don't want to sound smug here they do feel very 'plasticy' compared to my Nikon D700. I bought an EOS way back when they first came out in the late 80's (film of course) and it felt like a cheap Chinese toy compared to my F3. I had a fiddle with my mates 5Dii when I was in Thailand this year for holidays - methinks nothing has changed!</p>

<p>Sutto</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>This is just a re-post from your blog. What's the point?</p>

[faysal]

<p>We live in an age of plastic use. Oh well. Be it so. Many super cars are built with Carbon Fiber exteriors, thats just a fancy plastic fiber combo. It keeps them light so they can go faster. They are not considered to be built poorly.<br>

A camera does not need to weigh a lot to be a good camera or to be durable. The 5d has a mostly metallic "skelton" with some plastic sides that can take a beating, and be replaced if need be. This compromises nothing really. Those pieces are easily replaceable, and cut a lot out of the weight of a camera that you might be holding for 8+ hours at a wedding and reception.<br>

The 5dii still has some of the best IQ in the industry, has some of the best high iso iq, and gets to use glass that may tie nikon in quality, but beats nikon on price (even when it comes to the L's).<br>

So, woopty do. Find something better for the price, and use that. </p>

[dcstep]

<p>Carbon fiber can be non-polymer (pure carbon), but often contains polymers. Given its high tensil strength and low weight, there'll be a time in the not too distant future when we may all desire 100% carbon fiber camera bodies and lens casings, particularly on our 500mm lenses.</p>