As a long time 5Dclassic owner I was very skeptical back in 2009 when the 5DmkII was released and I decided I would skip the 5DmkII and wait for the mkIII as I thought it would not be much of an upgrade on the points where I wanted better performance: high ISO noise and AF. Basically I wasn't ready to spend 2.5k for what I thought was just a better screen and video.
I spent another 3 years with my trusted 5D classic and when I started to shoot for money I picked up a used 40D for €400. The 40D could not match the 5Dc IQ so I sold it one year later for €375 and I picked up a used 5DmkII for €1100 with 14k actuations.
So although I still don't think I would have paid anything between 2~2.5k for this camera, I do really like it for 1100 and it's a substantial upgrade to my 5Dc. But I only found out by actually using it, instead of reading about it.
Things I really like and now actually use:
- much better LCD
- new menus, especially My Menu
- AF Micro Adjustment
- extra crop room from 21mp files
- better handling ISO setting
- info screen with settings
- slightly improved noise performance is nice
Just wanted you to know that in this age where buying expensive cameras like 5DmkII, 1DmkIV and such seems much more normal, someone can be very happy with a 5DmkII, which I am sure many of you are still using as main camera. It's just that for me all these features are new, so I don't take them for granted yet.
I just upgraded from the 5dc to the mkII (a refurb) about 2 months ago. I have noticed iso3200 is at least as good as 1600 on the 5dc if not a half stop or more better. So maybe 1.5 stops better high iso performance? Just my experience in a short time. And yes, my upgrade story was similar to yours. I bought a used 5d in 2008 right before the mkii. It was a huge upgrade IQ wise from my 20d and I didn't buy into upgrading again. However, i was feeling the time was right to jump on a mkii with prices falling and did. I don't regret. Much better IQ, much improved LCD, live view (did not think I would necessarily care for it but love it). I don't mind just using the center point for AF, I am accustomed to focus/recompose and have not felt hindered in the least bit when I had the 5d(c).
I mentioned it a few times in related posts earlier, I bought my fist 5D II in 2009, and in April this year my second body. I intend to keep both bodies for years to come, I really like the MkII for my kind of photography style. The current newer models raise no need for me to upgrade soon. I think many are sitting in the same boat, continue to use their 5Dc and MkII versions.
State thy allegiance! Doest thou groketh the mark oneplusone as well? bbasiaga wrote:
I'm really curious to see if a non-native English speaker can decode that.
-Brian
brucemuir wrote:
How much is it really better in the ISO dept than 5D1?
I will comfortably shoot 1600 w/5D1 but am starting to see hot pixels here and there.
So I'm thinking you can get away with 3200 on 5D2 ? ? ?
Hi Bruce,
ISO3200 on the 5DmkII is my new "all safe" max ISO setting, meaning I can shoot any scene with it and rely on total cleanup. Provided accurately exposed.
But tell you what? I can use ISO 12800 now too! I can use it for scenes with evenly lit, mostly light tones like rooms with white walls. I expose a little bit to the right, so in reality I have about ISO 8000~10000 worth, but it will certainly do well up to 12" prints for a wedding album (wedding albums are very critical when it comes to noise because the client views a large page filling image from close range).
Be aware that the 5DmkII will start to show (mostly horizontal) banding beyond ISO6400 (so ISO expanded range only) but at ISO12800 Topaz can take out most of this banding, to a level that is acceptable.
I would not print 24" wedding album spreads from ISO12800, and maybe only sometimes from ISO6400.
ISO6400 is the twilight zone. I'll have to get some more data from different scenes to assess its usefulness.
So I would say that basically the 5DmkII has a one stop advantage over the 5Dclassic in "safe ISO" terms, but opens up more possibilities at the highest settings.
Anyway based on my present observations I would recommend the 5DmkII as a significant upgrade for high ISO noise. Much to my surprise actually because I had read the reviews on DPR and expected much less based on that.
retrofocus wrote:
I mentioned it a few times in related posts earlier, I bought my fist 5D II in 2009, and in April this year my second body. I intend to keep both bodies for years to come, I really like the MkII for my kind of photography style. The current newer models raise no need for me to upgrade soon. I think many are sitting in the same boat, continue to use their 5Dc and MkII versions.
I agree. For most subjects (all but one) that I shoot (portraits, business photography, events, macro, product and landscape) the 5DmkII is more than I need and I intend to keep using it for at least 5 years.
Still, if my wish to move more into shooting weddings comes true, I am seriously considering to sell my 5Dclassic in 1.5 years and get a 5DmkIII. Mainly for AF and silent shooting mode. My new 5DmkII will stay of course, so I can shoot 5DmkIII and 5DmkII side by side.
I was about to order a III when it was on €2700 last month, but then I decided to go and sit down on a 5-year business investment calculation and I found that if I get a mkII now and wait for 1.5 years with getting the mkIII, I would spend the same €€€ (about €1500 total costs in 5 years time for both cameras), but have a 5DmkIII+5DmkII instead of 5DmkIII+5Dclassic. This is based on a business investment with tax deduction options and selling all cameras after 5 years.
For now I'm going to enjoy the mkII to its fullest. I am very happy I pulled the trigger on this one!
I just got a Mark II as an upgrade to the 5D Classic. I am keeping the Classic but sold the 20D which was backup.
I'm very pleased with the 5D2.
It is a good thing that the 5D3 battery is the same as the 5D2. Like you, I am on an upgrade path where I hope to get the 5D3 next year and then, even though I like the Classic image quality and it has served me well, I'll sell it.
So I'm not the only one who fancies a 5D2 / 5D3 combo..... Let us know how you like this combo, even though it will not be for a year. I'm interested in your findings.
Congratulations Ralph! Your Odyssey comes to a successful conclusion!
I totally agree with all your reasons and observations.
You and I are two late-comers to the wonders of the 5D2, both of us buying used models this year. Well, we are frugal and smart shoppers.
I'm going to list my 5D1 here on FM soon and try to get a buyer at a good price, since it is a beauty. Right now my go-to set up is 5D2, 1Ds2, and 60D, and between them, those can do anything that comes my way. But I would still like to upgrade one more level in the next year, to a 5D3, 1Ds3, or (dare I say?) 6D. (Actually. . . I fancy a 1DX and 5D3 combo. . . or whatever new high MP/DR models are coming!)
I see about 1.5 to 2.0 stops improvement in ISO over the 5D1, going up to 3200. Where I was uncomfortable shooting events above 800 with the 5D1 due to fine detail loss, I am more than comfortable at 1600 with the 5D2.
I'll elaborate a bit more on my sense of the iso performance difference between 5D and 5D2. (I shot the 5D as my primary camera for three years or a bit more. I kept it as my second/backup camera when I got the 5D2 and I still have it. I have shot the 5D2 for almost four years now.)
On the 5D I would almost always choose to shoot at 100, especially for my primary landscape and related work. I would only move to 200 if there was not other option. I would not shoot such subjects at 400 since I'm pretty particular about image quality and I make large prints. I'm pretty certain that I never shot it higher than 800, and that only for other sorts of subjects.
On the 5D2 I still default to 100, largely out of habit perhaps, but I cannot really see any visible difference between photographs at 100 and 200 even at very large print sizes. As a consequence, I regard 100 and 200 as interchangeable in terms of IQ. If I look very closely at a 400 shot I can see some small difference in the amount of noise - but it is good enough that I've been known to shoot landscape at 400 and make large prints from the resulting photograph. I regularly use 400 and 800 for photographing wildlife, though I may apply some small degree of noise reduction in post in a few cases. I don't hesitate to shoot such subjects at 1600 if necessary, though I know that I'll need to do some post-processing cleanup. (Using 800 is common, using 1600 is rare for me in these cases.)
When shooting certain types of indoor events or handheld night photography I have used 3200 to good effect. I will need to reduce noise in post, but I can get quite decent results that will be very, very usable. For my part, I have not ventured beyond 3200 on the 5D2.
Gunzorro wrote:
Congratulations Ralph! Your Odyssey comes to a successful conclusion! [...] Cheers, best wishes. And ENJOY!
Monito wrote:
I just got a Mark II as an upgrade to the 5D Classic.[...] Like you, I am on an upgrade path where I hope to get the 5D3 next year and then, even though I like the Classic image quality and it has served me well, I'll sell it.
Hi Jim and Monito, so we're members of the fresh 5D2 users clan
So I could not resist. Is it one or two stops advantage? I shot my closet and here are 100% crops, much against my habit.
My conclusions:
- Up to ISO 3200, the 5DmkII is more than 1 stop ahead, but less than two stops. I would settle at 1.3 or so.
- Beyond ISO 3200, there is no comparison. This is logical as the 5D doesn't go further than 3200. But that is the whole point, isn't it? The 5DmkII can shoot up to ISO 25600 (I would never use that) and ISO 12800 is only a bit worse than 5D-3200.
Here are the crops. All sets 5D first, then 5DmkII.
Processing: import into LR4.1, export full size JPEGs, but 5DmkII downsized to 4368 (5D resolution). Then cropped and uploaded.
ISO 50
ISO 100
ISO 200
ISO 400
ISO 800
ISO 1600
ISO 3200
ISO 6400 (5D simulated by underexposing -1 and pull up +1 in PP)
ISO 12800 (5D simulated by underexposing -2 and pull up +2 in PP)
ISO 25600 (5D simulated by underexposing -3 and pull up +3 in PP)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comparisons:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
