bignorm wrote:
My 5dc never let me down.. I actually bought another one yesterday. Some of the work I do does nor require 22mp. Sometimes its more of a hindrance..
Money not wasted!!!!
That is what I am hoping...and that it was a sensible decision in my case as another 40D was a real temptation for me.....
Tell you the truth....I would still be using the 5d except for the awful lcd....the mark2
lcd just shows so much more detail and has better color to boot.
AGeoJO wrote:
But not as precise if you use a fast lens at a wide aperture, especially on tightly composed shots. The focus-and-recompose method may throw what you focus on just a little beyond or in the front of the critical focus plane.
I never had a problem with my LCD... anything past the 1d mkII is considered a good LCD.. ii rarely did the focus and recompose unless it was REALLY dark..
Get the camera and learn to use it.. everyone had different opinions about everything.. I used gorilla glue to permanently attach my 50L to mine and proceeded to use every focus point available...
echelonphoto wrote:
I am an event and portrait pro and have been shooting Canon digital for the past 9 years. I was
a big fan of the orig. 5d...then upgraded to the Mark2, I have been using the two mk2 bodies for the
last 4 years. With everyone raving about the new mk 3 and unbelievable af...I finally bit and bought
a new one on Friday. Took it out to my Sat wedding and shot with it as my main camera. First thing
I noticed was that it was much slower to acquire focus in one shot mode in lower light areas with the
flash assist. I'm not talking about really dark areas but normally lit indoor scenes at a reception. I would
have to wait one to two seconds for the focus confirmation beep....this is using the center af spot or group (I tried both) in one shot mode. Today I took out my current mk2 and my new mk3 and played with
both in my living room using the 24-105 lens. The light is on the lower side...maybe shooting at iso
2000 at 60th at F4. I first compared one shot mode....the Mk2 is def. faster to acquire...whether you use
flash or not. This is testing both the center point and outer point. In ai servo mode....they both appeared
to be equal....so what's up Canon? Is this a big sham...or am I doing something wrong?
The positive things I can say are the AWB seems to be more accurate and the photos do appear somewhat sharper. Also the adjustment with my two 600rt's...one master and one slave seems to be
more responsive and more accurate...the ettl works better. One the negative side...the shutter sounds
like s--t and the viewfinder seems to be darker....Show more →
While I'm really happy I've noticed the same issue. Try turning off the focus assist and trying again.
I hoped the new 600 flash would help but it hasn't. It just seems really keen to be 100% sure it's locked and I think it should need to be a little less certain in very low light.
You can waste your time in the halls of this forum getting opinions about gear and there will be much contradiction!!!
One thing to consider... the latest and greatest camera is always the biggest must have, until the next latest and greatest camera comes along... then all else becomes crap...
bignorm wrote:
You can waste your time in the halls of this forum getting opinions about gear and there will be much contradiction!!!
One thing to consider... the latest and greatest camera is always the biggest must have, until the next latest and greatest camera comes along... then all else becomes crap...
Hey Norm....we are talking about a real issue for many working pros....this is not made
up or user error....I have shot everything from leica m3's thru to current digital cameras
I just tell it like it is....hopeful for a solution. Except for autofocus....the mk2 and 3 are
a joy to use.
bignorm wrote:
You can waste your time in the halls of this forum getting opinions about gear and there will be much contradiction!!!
One thing to consider... the latest and greatest camera is always the biggest must have, until the next latest and greatest camera comes along... then all else becomes crap...
It is a valid point to go for the latest offered in technology especially electronics. I normally do this when I build a new PC after several years spent with at some point outdated system. I accept that I need to pay a higher price since the item is considered new and maybe fashionable, but I can then make use of it for quite a number of years.
It is a bit like this with DSLRs, too - I would say if you don't have a FF camera yet and you want to go this route in Canon land, 5D III and 6D are recommended depending on budget. Things are different if you already have a FF camera like the MkII - then the upgrading step is smaller and it depends a lot more on your personal style of photography if it is worth to you (well discussed above).
I disagree that older models "become crap" - electronically they might be outdated, but photography depends a lot more on composition than having the latest tool (= camera). Examples: I am still using sometimes my old 8MP Rebel XT on quick travels where a small and light DSLR comes handy. To add even more to this, yes, I am also still shooting film with my now very old Canon FTb and Canon Rebel XS SLR cameras. It is fun to have the latest and best tool, but sometimes I just use M modes, MF, keep it very simple. And the results are as good .
Any camera can be a joy to use if you quit focusing on its short comings and learn to use it for its strengths...
Cow poop stinks but it still makes a garden grow!!!
Many working pros used the 5d but didn't complain about what it couldnt do.. they worked around the weaknesses and used its strengths.. it doesnt matter what anyone of us used in the past because those cameras are still in the past... you put a good piece of glass on a 5D and it will produce amazing images... My first ever 150k+ year in photography was made with a 5dc and a 1d II..
I DIDNT SAY THE CAMERA DIDNT HAVE ITS WEAKNESSES BUT IF YOU LEARN YOUR GEAR IT WILL SERVE YOU WELL!!!!!
sorry for the all caps.. not screaming..didn't realize they were on and didn't want to retype everything I said..
gdanmitchell wrote:
I can't analyze your issue specifically, but your report may be a reminder to all who read too much about gear in camera forums and other similar places and get swept up in the early reports.
In general, even when newer gear offers improvements over older gear, the real value of the improvements is far smaller than the hyperbolic reports suggest. We read things like "camera X blows camera Y out of the water," "the difference is stunning," "X is miles better than Y," and so forth. In fact, X may be better than Y, but quite often by a smaller increment than we are led to expect and often in ways that don't really affect our work at all.
(To hear the initial reports we might sometimes imagine that new things are twice as good as old things. But with new things being introduced every couple of years, by now DSLRs would have to be - what? - about 30 times as good if that were true. They are better, but the increment is much smaller than that.)
In my view, the 5D3 is a great case in point. It is "better" than the 5D2 and is clearly a very fine camera. Canon did, more or less, what a lot of people often request - namely, take a good thing and improve it in areas where there is room for improvement. The 5D2, as those who actually shoot one know, is an excellent photographic tool that can produce truly wonderful image quality and which can work well in a wide range of shooting circumstance. It isn't perfect - nothing is - but it is very good.
In real world terms, the 5D3 is very similar in many ways and a bit better in others. However, if someone picks up a 5D2 and a 5D3 in twenty years from now and compares them, they will have to look very closely to identify the ways in which one is functionally different than the other, and they will regard image quality from the two cameras as being essentially indistinguishable. They are far more the same than they are different.
"In Japanese, there is a popular expression, "Kuuki Yomenai." Literally translated, it means someone who can't read the air...in plain English, it means someone who is clueless, or bad at reading situations and understanding what's going. This is a major complaint that older people have of younger people nowadays--that they are "kuuki yomenai"(KY from here on out. Also learned that there is "SKY"--"Super Kuuki Yomenai!") and generally incompetent."
If you have anything sensible and concrete to say in reply my points, go ahead and say it. If you want to insult me, do it in a language we both speak. :-(
when the 5d3 came out, I used the occasion to trade in my trusty 5dc for someone's old 5dII. My immediate thought was - what a waste of $800. I really didn't like much of anything in the new model. I upgraded to the 5d3 and have been really impressed. Mainly with focusing ability, but also with lots of small improvements all around to usability. But earlier posters had it right - each generation has incremental upgrades. In my case, upgrading from the 5dc to the 5dIII I could tell a real difference. But honestly, I would have been fine with the 5dc. I loved that camera, and it took great pictures.
echelonphoto wrote:
Chris....we are specifically talking about using the camera together with the flash using
the single shot mode....never said the ai servo mode was bad.
In your first post you said "....the Mk2 is def. faster to acquire...whether you use
flash or not"...and others chimed in with general statements about specific lenses...or how the 5D3 was slower to AF in low light than the 5D2 (or 5D). I responded in a general way because there's a lot of generalizations being made in this thread that don't reflect my experience with this camera at all. Perhaps there are other factors or issues at play...I don't know.
As far as single shot and/or using the AF assist beam from the flash...I use both frequently and haven't had any issues with either. In fact, here in my living room with the 85/1.8 and a 580 EX2 mounted...single shot mode...I just tried focusing on a black speaker cover (extremely low contrast target) at 1/30 @ F/1.8 @ ISO 25,600 light levels. The 5D3 AF locks fairly quickly and very accurately. I repeated the 'test' a bunch of times with and without the assist beam and it nailed focus accurately every time.
I've done this same 'test' from the same shooting location with the same lighting with the 7D, 5D, 5D2 and 1D3 and none of them can lock reliably without assist...and they often hunt or are inaccurate even with assist.
I'm not trying to give anyone a hard time...but some of the comments about this camera being slow to AF in low light or with certain lenses (with or without focus assist lighting) just have me scratching my head as my experience has been just the opposite...
bignorm wrote:
Any camera can be a joy to use if you quit focusing on its short comings and learn to use it for its strengths...
Cow poop stinks but it still makes a garden grow!!!
Many working pros used the 5d but didn't complain about what it couldnt do.. they worked around the weaknesses and used its strengths.. it doesnt matter what anyone of us used in the past because those cameras are still in the past... you put a good piece of glass on a 5D and it will produce amazing images... My first ever 150k+ year in photography was made with a 5dc and a 1d II..
I DIDNT SAY THE CAMERA DIDNT HAVE ITS WEAKNESSES BUT IF YOU LEARN YOUR GEAR IT WILL SERVE YOU WELL!!!!!
sorry for the all caps.. not screaming..didn't realize they were on and didn't want to retype everything I said.....Show more →
not to be rude, but what the hell are you talking about? The OP is commenting on how he is not seeing an improvement in a well known and documented shortcoming of the 5 series IN A SPECIFIC SITUATION that was supposed to be addressed in the 5d3. That is the reason he spent the money, and is now disappointed that he isn't seeing an improvement in that situation.
Your platitudes are tiresome drivel; he knows how to put the AF point over a part of the subject with contrast and then tell the camera to focus.
