First a huge thanks for all the great advice in the first thread! Really appreciated!!!
And I'm back after some more research.
One thing became kinda clear, specs don't always tell the full story. For example:
I'm looking at one of these three:
EOS 1D Mark II
EOS 5D (no mark)
EOS 50D
I can get any one of those for $450 ~ $550 in various conditions (as that price would dictate). Typically 100K clicks on the 1DMk2, 50K on the 5D, or 5K on the 50D.
A lot of you have seen photos from me (most not that good) so you may have some idea of how the camera will be used. So here's the question:
Between those three which one would you select? Reasonings? Ideas?
i think you have to sort out if you a full-frame or crop first. what kind of stuff will you be shooting? if AF isn't critical, i would say the 5D is your best bet. the PQ is excellent and i am personally biased towards FF anyway.
Feb 10, 2011 at 12:30 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I have a 50D which I like reasonably well. It is a pretty capable camera in most respects, but I would say it is not outstanding in any. I have the EF-S focussing screen and for someone who has manual focus alt glass I would say it is a necessity. It shoots as fast as I ever want 6.5 frames per second, and has decent resolution. At high ISO there is definitely some noise banding in the shadows, but I can shoot comfortably at ISO 1600 with just a tiny bit of post-processing to clean up extra noise. Below 1600 and I never worry about noise. The autofocus is alright, but I don't use it much (not at all at the moment as I sold my last AF lenses). I found the AF marginally better than my 20D, but just marginally better. So I can't say that I am disappointed with my 50D, but I can think of some clear reasons why I would prefer a 5D or 1D MKII.
I would prefer a 5D for the much better FF sensor and I may add this camera soon for that reason. I am pretty sure it would also have a much nicer viewfinder (although I can certainly use the one in the 50D). I would miss live view, which I use whenever I have the camera on a tripod (which is about half the time for me), but I think especially for indoor shooting at high ISO the 5D would be a much better camera.
I would prefer the 1D MKII for what I think would be much better autofocus. If I were shooting a lot of moving wildlife or sports I think this would be a lot better camera for those purposes. I shoot some wildlife and I enjoy it, but for me I will probably pass on the 1D MKII.
By the way, I think a 5D for $550 even with 50K on it is an amazing deal. I haven't seen one for less than $900, so seriously if you can get one at that price I think it would be hard to go wrong. If you can get two and are willing to sell one to me for $700 (which I would be quite interested in), then I would be very interested in helping finance your new camera
I am not a professional photographer but I bought a used Mark II several months back and continue to be amazed by what a great camera it is compared to it's current dollar value. I think the images from it look better than what I get from my wife's t2i. I haven't owned either of the other two so I can't compare against them. It is a big heavy body however and may be heavier than you want to carry.
That being said, if you can get me a used 5D classic for the price range you show, let me know! I haven't seen many under the $900 level
Hm, you are aware you listed all sensor sizes Canon makes for DSLR : FF, APS-H, APS-C ? Somehow, this zould be the first question to ask : will I be ok with a crop camera ? For example, if you want alt wides, I would suggest FF or maybe APS-H, if you want long, APS-H or APS-C, depending on AF and stuff like that. Your use will give you the key.
Get the 5D if you want to make full use of FL's up to ~100mm. Especially the shorter FL's shine much more on FF than they do on a cropper. I'm crazy about my Contax 28/2.8 on my 5D...
Off-topic: Hey Andreas, haven't seen you in a while. I also noticed Paul/Cogitech went missing.
Well, I'll be the one dissenting voice here. I had the 5D and sold it after less than a year. I just didn't like the rendering or colours that much, or the soft results. I personally much prefer the pro bodies as well, and competent AF, so my tip is to go for the 1DII (if it has to be Canon). This is the last pro body without the AF woes.
5d without a doubt. By the way I thought that it was not possible to get a shutter count from a 5d. Last time I checked, the software to do this with excluded the 5d.
Bifurcator,
Not sure if I can add much, but I own both the 5D and the 50D. And if I had to choose one, I wouldnt. Well, actually I'd chose the 5D if I didnt need a crop sensor camera to use with my telephoto for bird photography. For action, birds, the 5D is too slow and the FF sensor doesnt help when you need reach. For everything else, 5D is superior in image quality, has enough megapixels. And yes, it does draw dust, but its livable, clone-able, and can be cleaned. No experience with 1 series cameras. The prices you quote all sound good.
Scott
slungu wrote:
Hm, you are aware you listed all sensor sizes Canon makes for DSLR : FF, APS-H, APS-C ?
Your use will give you the key.
That's part of my problem I think! I like all forms of photography. I love birding - what a thrill! Landscaping is relaxing and satisfying! Close Focus photography of flowers and such brings a thankful tear of gratitude for the gift of life. Photomacrography and photomicrography is bizarre compelling and intriguing - what a joy. None seem more difficult than another - all are fun, rewarding, and challenging in some respect(s).
carstenw wrote:
I personally much prefer the pro bodies as well, and competent AF, so my tip is to go for the 1DII (if it has to be Canon). This is the last pro body without the AF woes.
sebboh wrote:
yeah, the 5D is the worst camera of the ones you listed for shooting birds, but the best for wide angle photography.
Interesting!
Also, it doesn't absolutely HAVE to be canon but being able to use and test EF lenses at different apertures is a compelling motivator for me! If there's something in that price range that has abilities or features that are more compelling I'm still open to them. I wanna be able to shoot RAW continuous, I want wide to be wide (not like M4/3), I want a sensor big enough to give good DR, Some way of eliminating front/back focusing for macro or really long lenses (IE sensor direct LiveView), AF that can track well, 8mpx or more, and a 3200 ISO that looks at least as good as the GH1's 800 ISO. Crop Sensor focal length multiplication isn't all that important to me as APO grade doublers exist and when used in combination with a somewhat good 3200 ISO, are fine for me. The only reason a crop sensor would be interesting to me is that the $500 will get me a newer model with more features like bigger continuous buffer maybe or faster live view, built-in intervelometer or whatever it's called, better JPEG processing for when the GF shoots with it - etc.
dkmiles1 wrote:
Cons;
Dust magnet
really clunky controls
AF is OK, not great
In this order;
5D
1D Mark ii - haven't used it, but I understand the AF system is just stellar
50D
sbeme wrote:
I own both the 5D and the 50D.
For action, birds, the 5D is too slow and the FF sensor doesnt help when you need reach. For everything else, 5D is superior in image quality, has enough megapixels. And yes, it does draw dust...
OK, it sounds to me like the 5D is off the list. That's probably a good thing as the $500 (± 50) means I have to accept one that looks as if it was used in Afghanistan - and used in continuous mode the entire time.
I don't need AF at all if the camera has a really fast Live View + magnification but I think none of these do. The 50D has LV but I wouldn't call it fast. Also one thing I noticed using my friends 20D was how much I hated sensor dust! I live in a 98 year old wood-framed mud house and the rooms just pour with the stuff. I can just see myself having to spend 20min cleaning the sensor every time I attach a bellows or swap a few lenses around.
carstenw wrote:
Well, I'll be the one dissenting voice here. I had the 5D and sold it after less than a year. I just didn't like the rendering or colours that much, or the soft results.
Something was definitely wrong with your 5D if it was soft. Mine could hardly be sharper even when looking at 100%.
Dust isn't too much of a problem for me and I don't think the 1DmkII would be better in this regard. After the first wet clean (if there's any welded dust) a few puffs with a rocket blower has been enough for me to get rid of any dust on my 5D's sensor.
For alt work, I imagine the 5D is the better choice. If you want reliable AF and build quality though, the 1D Mark II is simply fantastic. I had one for almost 8 years, and found it to be an absolute delight to use. Under no circumstance would I spend the money on a 50D if my other options are a 5D or a 1D Mark II. The x0 series cameras simply don't measure up to the EOS-5 or EOS-1 machines, either in terms of IQ or ruggedness/reliability.
HBOC wrote:
I have chosen the 1Ds (Mk1) over the 5D in two separate occasions. I do NOT regret my decision for one second. Sure the 5D is 3 years newer (used prices are about the same here in the States), has a better LCD (they both are not good by todays' standards) and like 2 more MP. The 1Ds blows it away in AF, build. I haven't used a 5D, so i cannot compare the files personally. I think the VF in the 1 series is brighter and larger as well. I love mine for ALT lenses!! Here are a few from my 1Ds + ALT lenses...Show more →
Well I also got the 1Ds over the 5D because it had a decent viewfinder, less problems with alts and the mirror and a fast AF when needed. It worked great for a while, but now I got a NEX, because the 1Ds was left at home for weight reasons. While not shooting them side by side , I had the impression the 1Ds is a little noisy compared to the 5D, and I pushed myself not to use it above ISO800, but for low ISO it is a good camera.
AhamB wrote:
Something was definitely wrong with your 5D if it was soft. Mine could hardly be sharper even when looking at 100%.
I did consult with Canon about it, sending them raw photos, and they said it was fine. If there was something wrong with it, it was nothing Canon would confirm. It also compared well to other 5Ds I have tested. I guess we just have different expectations.
Keep in mind that I went to a camera with a CCD sensor and no AA filter. I much prefer moire from time to time than soft results all the time, and having to fiddle around with USM so much.
