Alright, guys, I in the middle of an upgrade right now. I sold my 50D and and saving up the rest for a 5D mk II. In the meantime, my buddy loaned me his old orginal 5D to use, which I could potentially buy, along with a 70-200 2.8 non IS. So, what would you guys do? Would you get the mkII or would you get the original 5D plus the lens?
Depends a bit on what other lenses you have, but I don't think buying a 5d mark II is a great idea right now in any case unless you really need one (or can get a decent used one). Too much is getting shaken up right now with bodies. A new canon body announcement is going to mean savings on the mark II.
Edit: saw your other lenses, that 70-200 is a good fit for your kit. Id go the original 5d plus lens.
Yeah, I was definitely gonna wait to see what happened in the 5D line in hopes that the mkII went down a bit in price. In addition to the macro, I have a 17-40 f4, a 50mm 1.4, and an 85mm 1.8.
5D + glass is a great option, IF you can deal with the LCD, lack of live view, and lack of dustbuster. Anyway, those were the main compromises that pushed me to a 5D2. I hate cloning out gazillions dust motes.
mco_970 wrote:
IF you can deal with the LCD, lack of live view, and lack of dustbuster. Anyway, those were the main compromises that pushed me to a 5D2. I hate cloning out gazillions dust motes.
Another perspective ...
For me, I don't mind the 5 Classic LCD even though I have other bodies with bigger LCDs. I've never given the smaller size a second thought.
As for Live View, I have other bodies with it and never use that feature.
As for dust spots, I regularly clean all my sensors, myself (even those bodies with a dust shaker) and don't have a problem with dust on my images. I can clean a sensor in literally 30 seconds. I would think most pros would want to be cleaning their sensors themselves routinely.
I get great results from my 5D + 70-200mm f/2.8L non-IS. Nothing negative to say about it, and lots of positive. If you can live without live view and microadjust, and you don't need the extra pixels....
Perhaps we should be asking you what you think of the 5D + 70-200mm combo?
I've never personaly used the 70-200, but I trust the guy and when he says it's sharp, I know it is. I love the 5D and can live with the LCD and the lack of dust shaker. I kinda got used to the live view on my 50D, but could live without. Megapixels don't really bother me that much. I was planning on using the mkII on mRAW alot of the time, so I avoid the inevitable computer upgrade a little while longer. It kinda seems like I'm talking myself into it.
mweddle wrote:
I've never personaly used the 70-200, but I trust the guy and when he says it's sharp, I know it is. I love the 5D and can live with the LCD and the lack of dust shaker. I kinda got used to the live view on my 50D, but could live without. Megapixels don't really bother me that much. I was planning on using the mkII on mRAW alot of the time, so I avoid the inevitable computer upgrade a little while longer. It kinda seems like I'm talking myself into it.
With all that you say then I would go the lens route. Unless you want the extra benefit of better hi iso and possible the video then the 5Dc + lens makes good sense.
Don't forget money spent on bodies will always drop heavy % (some faster than others) while money spent on good glass will always hold value .
You can always justify the cost of glass as a hire charge
I purchased the 5D1 right after the 5D2 was released w/ a 24-105L for ~$1,800. It's an amazing camera body, still worth about what I paid, and I can't imagine a better ~$1,000 body you can purchase. At minimum I would wait to see what happens with the 5D line. I've owned a 70-200 before, but I pair mine with the 24-105L and 85L. Plan on adding a 24L before spring.
I must be very lucky or have a magical 5D, because my dust problem is pretty much nonexistent. Granted, I have only two lenses, but still...
Still nothing wrong with 5D, has great IQ and for me that's tops. Sure it would be nice to have some higher MP and live view (and a freaking 2sec timer), but nothing I can't live without.
If you print 13x18 or larger, the 5D2 will give you more detailed prints. It will also allow you to focus more precisely via LV. If you can, borrow the 70-200 lens to see if 200mm without IS is the right choice for you and if you are all right with the size and weight.
The IQ on the 5d is still top notch, if you do not need the LV, sensor cleaning, more MPs and other features on the 5dii. Plus, with the current prices on the second hand market, you can get one for a bargain price.
I would hold on and watch the 5D2 prices fall when a new 5D3 is released.
You have some pretty good glass there, and I think you'll see a very noticeable difference between the 5D and 5D2. I can see better imaging detail just from moving up to the 16.7MP 1Ds2 from the 5D.
Don't be swayed by your friend's opinion: I had the 70-200 IS version I, and sold it when I owned the 5D original -- didn't feel it was sharp enough. You will find your 100 Macro is much sharper, unless you really need 100-200mm and top IQ is not the main concern. The 70-200 IS v. II is another matter, and another price range. You would really appreciate IS on 70-400mm range.
I say to go for increased resolution with the fine lenses you already own. That means 5D2 or 5D3. You'll be much further ahead in the IQ game.
Well, the video doesn't really interest me at this time, but the option would be nice. Better high ISO would be a plus, something I never really enjoyed on my 50D, and I know I would enjoy the resolution on the 5DII. Maybe I should just try to free up some cash and get the lens and the 5DII. I'm definately going to wait and see what happens to the prices in the 5D line, since I'm not really in a rush to get a camera at this point since he really doesn't need the 5D back anytime soon. Thanks for all your opinions, it gives me something to think about.
Don't be put off the 70-200mm by the naysayers. The IS mk1 might not be the mk2, but it was plenty sharp enough for thousands of pros to make a living with it for many years.
Also, the Mk1 non-IS (which you mentioned) is reckoned to be a bit sharper than the IS version, though not as good as the mk2. And frankly, if you are in the budget range for a non-IS then you are a long way from buying the Mk2.
I don't know what your future finances will be like, but if the medium term choice is between a 5D + 70-200mm and a 5D2, i'd take the former.
