What;s with all the fascination and drooling over the D700 that is $300 more.
If offers MUCH lower resolution, the old 5D beat it handily in fine detail rendering.
The D700 may be a better sports camera, but that's about it. The 5DII will smoke it in everything else and most importantly where it counts- IQ.
It will likely have about the same high ISO noise AND nearly double the MPs. FULL HD video for those that may want it.
A better LCD and MUCH better LV implementaion.
Nikon's new AF system is not the be all to end all. It has its issues. And basically it to has only one cross type sensor, just a bigger one. All 15 cross type sensors are packed in the middle where they essentially become one large sensor.
No advantage whatsoever on the peripheral sensors- many reported problems of the uselessness of the outer sensors in low light and/or with fast apertures with the Nikon system.
I just don't see how people can complain so much. It has many more features than either the A900 or D700, costs LESS than either, and will without a doubt handily beat them both in IQ.
Dreamliner wrote:
What's the matter with you people ? I just can't understand you !
Canon delivered a very-very nice camera and I see you complaining about -almost- everything ! You complain about the AF module because of not having 45-51 sensors, when I use only the center one on my 1D MKII, my 40D and my 30D for tracking planes, birds etc. You complain about the resolution (it's to high !...) and you doubt about the high ISO IQ just because Nikon produced a 12 mp camera with excellent IQ in high ISO. And none of you has even tried this brand new camera ! You seem to forget that nobody from Canon asked you more bucks for this high mp camera. You pay the same amount and you buy twice the resolution. And you probably buy a comparable high ISO performance which in print could be even better than D700's just because of this high resolution ! If you try it and you don't like it, just buy whatever you like. I did it 7 years ago and I understand everyone that is dissapointed by his camera's system. But I think it's not fair to complain for something that you don't actually know it yet or you think that you know ! ...Show more →
The 5d II having the exact same crappy auto focus of the 5D in low light particularly is a legitimate concern/complaint. To me it's the only thing I am unhappy about with the specs.
So I'm waiting until the question on "improved AF" is answered. Too much conflicting information. For me to upgrade from the 5DMKI to the new one is simply lower noise/higher ISO and improved AF. It looks like one out of two. I do a lot of shooting with fast primes and wide open and I typically use the center point and do some cropping becuase the outer points are a bit less reliable where I shoot. No, I can't afford the IDS. I have a IDMKII that's wonderful. We'll wait and see on the AF thing. Would I consider switching to the D700? There's a possibility. I think I'll try one out, which is something I wouldn't have done a few months ago. If the MKII does use cross type sensors and they work in lower light, that may be enough for me. I have a 40D and no, I've not tried them with the 85 F1.2 35 F1.4. I did throw the 50 F1.2 on it earlier this week and shot it wide open. The results were mixed. Anyway, I'm waiting. I do have a 50D on order. Maybe that will keep me busy for a while.
I should add, that even with the same auto focus system I will get the 5D II..I was shooting a job when I had the 5D all in low light and it was a pain in the butt..But I am excited about selling the 1ds mark II and getting a 5d II..I look forward to a smaller camera and a better LCD is a bonus..not to mention larger file size..
Il Medico wrote:
What;s with all the fascination and drooling over the D700 that is $300 more.
If offers MUCH lower resolution, the old 5D beat it handily in fine detail rendering.
The D700 may be a better sports camera, but that's about it. The 5DII will smoke it in everything else and most importantly where it counts- IQ.
No fascination, no drooling, just simple fact that the D700 provides features that Canon does not, in a package that Canon apparently refuses to develop.
10-12MP of resolution is adequate for 90% of what 90% of the people out there do; I certainly don't need more than 12-16MP for less than 10% of what I shoot. With 10MP, I can print a fine 13x19" print, cropping included. I don't need 21MP.
What I do need is a compact, weather-sealed pro body with an interface identical to my 1-Series camera; yes, with pro-level AF. I'd like it to have a horizon leveling option (yes, I'm lame). I'd like it to have LCD-based gridlines that magically show up in the viewfinder when I want them. I'd like the viewfinder to show the AF points that I have selected, and not show the ones I've not. I'd like a pop-up flash for my 'backup' body (I know, boo-hiss!), one that can even control off-camera flash (yay!). I'd like to see a more intelligent implementation of the 2000+ pixels that the light meter has ('binning' them into subsets to be averaged out is an analog approach in a digital world). Perhaps you get the idea.
I didn't expect any of that in the 5D successor, and adding 10MP to my images isn't going to make them intrinsically better.
Jimbob covers it. 1dm2 are better for several reasons. They dropped ball on the m3 version. They price the S too high for day to day working slobs or at least the extra 4k is better used elsewhere. They don't put enough precision in the middle stuff. Working professionals are bit by bit getting po'd, some drifting off to other brands. I too will take a closer look at the 700 and take it for a spin.
My image quality assessment starts with the focus in thy correct spot. I don't need 20 odd megapixels of background backfocus. We'll see what this thing does in reality. Increasingly not a happy camper now that there's gear to update and I don't like my choices or quality points.
geir wrote:
I'm thinking of getting one. Should either way be better than my 20D (and full-frame will be really nice for my 17-40 to work with)
I hope I am wrong, but your 17-40L may suffer a little bit with the 21 MP sensor behind it. I am not sure what 1DsmkIII users think about that (well, I just remember the alternatives board getting even more traffic after each release of a new, larger MP full frame sensor by Canon, or the release of one at a lower price point).
john660 wrote:
Major disappointment. Where's the EOS-3 digital body that everyone has been clamouring for for years? Only 4 fps and no adjustments to the AF system? MAJOR letdown. I may be done with Canon after this and the 1D Mk III fiasco that cost me tens of thousands.
The original Eos 3 was also 4 fps.
I'd also point out, my 40D has significantly faster, and in most conditions , more accurate , autofocus compared to my Eos 3.
Given the new 5D AF seems to be a hybrid of that 40D system and the original 5D one, and westfall says its better than the 40/50D system , the mark II appears to match the eos 3 in fps, and AF, although its missing the eye control focus I love, plus it has low light prformance I couldnt even dream of 10 years ago, which part of the eos 3 in digital do you think is missing?
As Xavier alludes to above, many seem to have neglected to take into account the effects of those 21 MP upon marginal glass; me thinks you're going to need a 'bigger boat'! The real reason Canon gave it so many MP (in addition to all the 1Ds MkIII sensors lying around)...
I'm surprised at all of the complaining going on about the 5DII. For me it's a dream camera. I've got the current 5D right now, which I love, and I've only had two main complaints. 1) it's a dust magnet, 2) sparse feature set (i.e. things like auto-ISO).
The new 5D addresses that and much more. If the high ISO performance is better than the 50D, which is a reasonable expectation, then this camera is going to be an incredible low-light performer. The IQ and level of detail at ISO 100 will be stunning.
I'm actually ambivalent about the 21 MP - I've been perfectly happy with 12.8MP, and feel no need for more. But I'm not complaining about the extra MP either, presuming IQ is maintained. If Canon is correct about this being the highest IQ of any camera they've produced, then it's going to blow me away.
3.9 fps? MORE than enough for me. I cannot remember one time where I have ever missed a shot because my camera couldn't take more than 4 frames in a second.
9 point AF? I came to the 5D from the Pentax K10D, and I was blown away by how fast and accurate the 5D AF was compared to the 5D. I've never had a complaint about it at all. I only use the center-point anyhow. Plus, now I can calibrate each of my lenses, which should give even better results.
And of course, the HD video. As an expecting father, I have to say that I am super excited about this. The quality is simply amazing from the samples I've seen, and the ability to have extremely narrow DOF (like in the video Mike linked to) looks like so much fun! To me this is worth the upgrade alone.
Finally, dust has driven me crazy on the 5D. The self-cleaning sensor of the 5DII is also enough to make me upgrade alone.
The price of $2700 seems quite reasonable to me.
I understand why some folks are complaining, and I'm sorry the 5DmkII didn't meet your expectations. But for me, it is exactly what I need.
Jennifer H-L wrote: I would buy their 'pro' cameras for the spec etc but I NEED the smaller body - they don't seem to get that do they?! No, they don't.
So you really NEED a smaller body? Buy an Olympus E3. It's small and it looks professional. If you NEED some specific properties in a camera there is more than just EOSfun. This is a free market with lots of opportunities, no need to blame one of the manufacturers for the fact that they don't get you. They don't need to get everybody you see. They want the customers that know and appreciate the EOSfun
I'm holding out until the 5D Mark III. My 5D Mark I is more than enough now. The only thing I would really benefit from the Mark II is the Ultra-High-ISO performance but then I only use ISO 1600+ about 5% of the time.
I do really like Sony's offering with its 100% .76x mag viewfinder and its 5fps with the built-in I.S.
jamesf99 wrote:
I have $20k to $30k in Canon lenses, more than what's in my profile. If you'd like to pay me for them, I'd be glad to sell them to you. Until then STFU..
Wow. That amount of money invested and still not happy. I feel for you. Oh no, wait, I don't. Your comments are tiring. Until you realize this whole business is not about what YOU feel is appropriate: why don't you keep quiet instead of calling other people off?
Anyone care to guess how hard this will be to get when it comes out? And when it will be really not so hard to get? I want to sell my 1ds mark II but want the 5dII first!
