EOS Recommendation

[russell_bastock]

I currently have an EOS 5D mk II, but it has obvious limitations and want to upgrade. I specialise in available light night photography and use mostly an EF 70-200mm 2.8 L IS USM lens. The issue with the current setup is that the camera/lens has trouble focusing in low light with moving subjects, such as street parades, often confused by a bright part of the subject and focusing on that instead of say someone's eyes. Its also too slow to track subjects or snap to focus in low light, so someone almost walks past without hitting focus. I've been shooting for years, so its not my technique that's lacking. Due to budget limitations I can't upgrade that lens, so I'm wondering what improvements there are in body-based low light focus mechanics.

 

Another issue with the mk II is the dials can't be locked, so I'm forever bumping settings. And I also want to start shooting continuous 1080 video, which the Mk II cuts out at about 12 mins.

 

I was initially thinking of swapping to a EOS R due to its low light capabilities but I've read the dials/options are a mess, so I don't want to go back there. I can't afford a 1D but how much does a 5D Mk IV fit my needs or are there other close models I should investigate? Any comments on the above appreciated.

[JDMvW]

it has obvious limitations and want to upgrade

 

It all depends on what you want to do and what kind of images you need to capture.

 

I personally see little reason to go further than my 5D mk II will take me.

 

However, I will confess a certain GAS to go to 50.60 megapixels, but that is really way beyond what I, at least, am ever likely to need.

 

As for the dials and such "being a mess", I urge you to ignore the on-line gossip and try one for your self.

[jdebever]

I recently upgraded to the 5d mk iv. And i recommend it.

advantage is it has the same user interface as the mk II, so you can easy use both.

(i'd put the 70-200 on the 4, 24-70 on the 2.) Although the mk 4 and the 24-70 2.8L are a dream combo in my book..

I use them for concerts.

Did play a bit withthe R , love the lenses, didn't like the viewfinder and the layout.

j.

[russell_bastock]

Thanks for that. I've had a quick look at some comparisons and I realise the R is an amateur model. SD card and half the functions are missing or hidden, so I'll stick the the DSLR config. It'd be fun to play with I'm sure, but not my spec.

 

I recently upgraded to the 5d mk iv. And i recommend it.

advantage is it has the same user interface as the mk II, so you can easy use both.

(i'd put the 70-200 on the 4, 24-70 on the 2.) Although the mk 4 and the 24-70 2.8L are a dream combo in my book..

I use them for concerts.

Did play a bit withthe R , love the lenses, didn't like the viewfinder and the layout.

j.

[JDMvW]

I realise the R is an amateur model.

 

???????

You need to reassess what sources you are consulting.

[Jochen_S]

Long 1080p videos: Will Magic Lantern on the Mk II help to do them? - Its not available for the Mk. IV.

Sorry I don't have a Mk II, so I can't tell if the IV is better focusing in low light. - I noticed mine benefitting from an AF assist beam projector. And no, I don't hit eyes in focus with 200/2.8 head shot attempts either.

[russell_bastock]

I went with the 5D Mark IV, I'm happy with it. The autofocus in the body is far superior to the Mk II, snappy and more accurate, and the dial locking sliders are great, no need for gaffa tape workarounds.

[matt_t_butler]

The R is great for night time work when using the EVF - for framing/focus when adjusted for low light viewing.

A big difference between using the optical viewfinder. Just my opinion.

(I have been using a 5D2 with its single card slot for around ten years - still a good workhorse.)