Owned a 5D, 5DII, and 1DsIII. The 5D was a great camera for its time and I think the quality of the images made with it stand up easily to my 1DsIII and I suspect, but don't know, to the later Canons including the 5DIII. I don't remember any focusing problems with the 5D, certainly none like I had with the 5DII and its almost useless outer focus points. My only two problems with the 5D that I remember were the fact that it attracted dust like flies to fly paper and the lack of Live View. Especially when using a TS lens, I couldn't live without LV today.
If I were in your situation I'd have a real dilemma because I don't think much of the 5DII (apart from focusing problems it had to be sent to Canon twice for repair in the year I had it) but the 5D lacks LV. What you really should do IMHO is stretch the budget if possible and get a 5DIII or 7D but I know how hard that can be. If that's not possible, and if you can live without LV and 13mgs, then I'd get the 5D and save up for a 5DIV (or wait until the inevitable price drop on the 5DIII).
I should add that I use a tripod 90% of the time so high ISO isn't generally important to me, which eliminates a lot of possible noise problems, and I rarely photograph moving objects.
campyone wrote:
Owned a 5D, 5DII, and 1DsIII. The 5D was a great camera for its time and I think the quality of the images made with it stand up easily to my 1DsIII and I suspect, but don't know, to the later Canons including the 5DIII. I don't remember any focusing problems with the 5D, certainly none like I had with the 5DII and its almost useless outer focus points. My only two problems with the 5D that I remember were the fact that it attracted dust like flies to fly paper and the lack of Live View. Especially when using a TS lens, I couldn't live without LV today.
If I were in your situation I'd have a real dilemma because I don't think much of the 5DII (apart from focusing problems it had to be sent to Canon twice for repair in the year I had it) but the 5D lacks LV. What you really should do IMHO is stretch the budget if possible and get a 5DIII or 7D but I know how hard that can be. If that's not possible, and if you can live without LV and 13mgs, then I'd get the 5D and save up for a 5DIV (or wait until the inevitable price drop on the 5DIII).
I should add that I use a tripod 90% of the time so high ISO isn't generally important to me, which eliminates a lot of possible noise problems, and I rarely photograph moving objects.
The fact you had a duff 5DII doesn't make them all bad.
The simple truth is the 5DII is a vastly better camera than the 5D, which is basic, old and slow with few features and a poor lcd, no sensor cleaning or live view and only 13 meg.
Buy an old clunker if you want, but you'll regret it eventually.
dhphoto wrote:
The simple truth is the 5DII is a vastly better camera than the 5D, which is basic, old and slow with few features and a poor lcd, no sensor cleaning or live view and only 13 meg.
I don't think anyone is denying the 5DII is a better camera. Just that for the price, an original 5D offers extremely good value for money in terms of image quality per pound, and for those of us without large pockets or a business to buy expensive kit for us, a used 5DII is actually pretty expensive. I for one can't justify spending the thick end of a thousand quid on a camera, but i can scrape together 4-500 quid and at that price an original 5D stands out as a great image making machine.
And i would say that after two years of Old Clunker ownership i have no regrets at all.
15Bit wrote:
I don't think anyone is denying the 5DII is a better camera. Just that for the price, an original 5D offers extremely good value for money in terms of image quality per pound, and for those of us without large pockets or a business to buy expensive kit for us, a used 5DII is actually pretty expensive. I for one can't justify spending the thick end of a thousand quid on a camera, but i can scrape together 400 quid and at that price an original 5D stands out as a great image making machine.
And i would say that after two years of Old Clunker ownership i have no regrets at all. ...Show more →
From some of the ill-informed posts here and elsewhere an uninformed observer might think there are actual real issues with the the 5DII, which there simply aren't. It is the best ever selling full frame dslr for a reason, it's bloody excellent.
In the same way that the 5D gets a better press than it deserves the 5DII gets a worse one, almost to the point of some utter fools here saying it's 'unusable'.
If you want to buy an old tired camera then fine, but don't complain when the mirror falls off, dust gets on your sensor or in your prism or the IQ at high ISO isn't what you expected.
dhphoto wrote:
From some of the ill-informed posts here and elsewhere an uninformed observer might think there are actual real issues with the the 5DII, which there simply aren't. It is the best ever selling full frame dslr for a reason, it's bloody excellent.
I have no doubt.
In the same way that the 5D gets a better press than it deserves the 5DII gets a worse one, almost to the point of some utter fools here saying it's 'unusable'.
I don't think its fair to say that the 5D gets better press than it deserves. Even today there are not very many DSLR's on the market that can beat the IQ. Certainly the crop sensors haven't really caught up yet (particularly at high ISO), so its really only subsequent 5D's, 1 series and the new 6D that offer better IQ. I'd say that's pretty impressive. For sure some folk do look back perhaps a little *too* nostalgically to their long departed 5D's but almost everyone i've seen comment who actually has one today says it takes great images. That's then "accurate press" to me. As for the 5DII, well i'm not fortunate enough to be able to afford one so i have no first hand experience. I would agree that some folk did get rather hysterical over the AF and shadow banding though.
If you want to buy an old tired camera then fine, but don't complain when the mirror falls off, dust gets on your sensor or in your prism or the IQ at high ISO isn't what you expected.
I don't think anyone has. Personally i'm not hugely fussed about the dust in the VF and the sensor dust doesn't seem to show up too much for me as i tend to shoot at larger apertures. And i find high ISO IQ to be great rather than disappointing.
I bought a 5D expecting exactly what i got - a "cheap" FF camera that lacks mod cons and sophisticated AF, but produces really nice images. Further, i don't worry about knocking it around a bit when using it, about taking it out skiing and hiking, nor about taking it to pieces to replace and calibrate focus screens etc. because i know it wouldn't cost me too much to replace if it does get broken.
dhphoto wrote:
The simple truth is the 5DII is a vastly better camera than the 5D, which is basic, old and slow with few features and a poor lcd, no sensor cleaning or live view and only 13 meg. Buy an old clunker if you want, but you'll regret it eventually.
Such nonsense. The 5D II is not "vastly" better. The 5D Classic is not an "old clunker." And except for "basic," which it is (and which in some minds can be considered a quality), "old and slow" is simply ridiculous.
He'll never, ever regret owning the 5D Classic. I know of no one who has ever regretted owning it. Indeed, I've known quite a few who have regretted owning the 5D Mark II.
- Steve
veroman wrote:
Such nonsense. The 5D II is not "vastly" better. It's not an "old clunker." And except for "basic," which it is (and which in some minds can be considered a quality), "old and slow" is simply ridiculous.
He'll never, ever regret owning the 5D Classic. I know of no one who has ever regretted owning it. Indeed, I've known quite a few who have regretted owning the 5D Mark II.
- Steve
Fanboyism, yet again. You really should stop and listen to yourself after actually using the two side by side.
Oh stop it. Being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory doesn't do anybody any good and reveals more about you than anything else. I repeat: no one ... and I mean NO ONE ... who has ever owned the 5D Classic has ever regretted the purchase. The OP might go on to owning something else after he's spent his time with the 5D ... as so many have ... but he will never, ever, and I mean NEVER, EVER, regret having purchased it.
Try to contribute something useful,will you you please?
- Steve
dhphoto wrote:
Fanboyism, yet again. You really should stop and listen to yourself after actually using the two side by side.
I have used the two side by side. I sold the 5D II.
- Steve
veroman wrote:
Oh stop it. Being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory doesn't do anybody any good and reveals more about you than anything else. I repeat: no one ... and I mean NO ONE ... who has ever owned the 5D Classic has ever regretted the purchase. The OP might go on to owning something else after he's spent his time with the 5D ... as so many have ... but he will never, ever, and I mean NEVER, EVER, regret having purchased it.
Try to contribute something useful,will you you please?
- Steve
Jefferson wrote:
5Dc... old, slow, IQ not up to par... not worth the money... Never Mind...
The proof is ALWAYS in the pictures. Thanks for posting.
- Steve
BTW guys and gals... I am saving for a 5Dc. I can't justify anything better for a few years. I don't make piles of money and I have a pair of kids, 6 & 10... they are my focus and if I can make better images mainly for my hobby, I will use an older not so full featured body. I do not have to have the latest and greatest body... it is a light box after all!
I would love the 5DII or 5DIII, but that would prevent any lens or other gear purchases for 2 or 3 years. I rented and have lusted after 2 lenses, the 300/4L IS (bought it) and the 400/5.6L (will buy it). I have my 7D for kids sports and am happy with it for that purpose. A FF would mainly be for landscape, macro and portraits.
