Like most mortals, budget is a conderation in this thread and I have to again vote for a 5Dc and glass over a 5D2 and lesser (or no) glass.
Not that I found the 5D2 particularly bad - I think it's a swell camera. Now, is it *3 times* the camera of the 5Dc? Heavily debateable, but for me, it's certainly not. I don't give a hoot about video, the 21MP is nice but nothing I can't live without. Really, the 5D2's only benefit (to ME) was the excellent live view and maybe some other things I can't remember off the top of my head.
For evidence -- I had a 5Dc setup, 70-200 Mark II and I think a 24-105. It was a lovely setup.
I sold it all to try out Sony A77, then went back to Canon but this time a 5D2, 70-200 2.8 mk 1 (a good copy), a Tamron 28-75 and 100/2
This is a perfect example of glass over body - For me at least, the 5Dc setup was much more pleasing than the 5D2 setup. The 5D2 setup was pretty good actually, but the better glass of the 5Dc setup made a more noticeable difference to me than the better body of the 5D2 setup.
Get the glass first, let the bodies depreciate, then upgrade them a cycle or two "behind".
My 5D is used pretty much exclusively for macro and family shots of my 7 year old. I would also be doing landscape but i screwed my back shortly after getting it and don't get out into the wilds so much now
For macro and portraiture it is really great. I do an annual A3 calendar for the family and printing to 10-12 inches is no problem. If i wanted to go to 20 or 30 inches i could see a good case for the mk2, but 13MP is plenty for everything i can imagine i will ever do.
I agree with Dan Mitchell that the 5DII is the better choice, but if you simply cannot spend that much money, the 5D still satisfies. A beautiful sensor mated to an adequate camera body. Put an Ee-S focusing screen in it and enjoy shooting with manual focus.
Small images don't really do it justice, but why not........
I want to reiterate what I said originally (and I have owned four 5D's).
They are decent full frame digital cameras but the idea they are as good as the 5DII just isn't true.
If funds really are that tight then a good used 5D will hopefully serve you well, but the file size, high ISO performance, sensor cleaning, LCD, video, acceptance of wireless remotes and all manner of other things make the 5DII a much better camera. They just do.
The 5D is almost sainted and the 5DII is almost derided but that simply isn't the reality. If you need to crop a 5D file you can very quickly run short of pixels, there is no microadjustment, only 12-bit RAW files and a very clunky body.
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.
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....Show more →
Hi dhphoto,
As much as I generally like your opinions (I really do) I feel you're exaggerating a bit now. As a 5D + 5DII user I immediately agree that the 5DII has its benefits in a number of ways. And I don't regret buying it. But to call a 5D old and tired, in my opinion, might be just a bit silly. We live in the digital age (well most of us do anyway) and I'd be the last person to say that that isn't a photographer's blessing. But in the film age if we would buy an absolutely great camera (like I did when I got myself a Nikon F801s in 1992) we could enjoy that camera for 10 or 20 years (and longer) because later models generally did not add as much of a gain as today. A camera that was great at the time of purchase continued to be great for a very long time. And the 5D in particular is just one of those cameras that continue to please over and over again. If we would have a 10 year cycle before the next model would come out you it would still be the latest and greatest and you would not speak of it as you do now.
This is not a defense in favour of the 5D, I merely don't agree with what you're saying. And I'm not one of the zealous "5D classic is still the best" users. I'm very practical about these things and if I think my business would benefit from it, I could end up with a pair of 1Dx's by the end of this year and sell off the 5D in a heart beat.
Of course I value other's opinions and I appreciate courtesy. That's what still makes this forum stand out.
Hi Morgan,
Colours in RAW files SOOC can differ between models, even between several copies of the same model. My 5D and 5DmkII were a bit different at first but I created a profile in Lightroom for both the 5D and the 5DmkII. Now, to clients, they're indistinguishable.
Have you tried profiling? You might like your 5DmkIII more after that.
^^ yeah, thats what I read. Seems like you are saying they cant compete with todays cameras but I have been doing wedding photography since the 5D came out. I have owned a 5D, a 1DIIN a, a 1DsII, a 1DIII, 1DIV and a 5D3. The camera that has remained is the 5Dc, I am in two minds as to wether or not to keep the 5DIII.
I routinely shoot dungeons and grotty receptions.
So the above should tell you that I am either a complete moron or the 5D has qualities that make it photographically excellent, even in challenging light.
morganb4 wrote:
^^ yeah, thats what I read. Seems like you are saying they cant compete with todays cameras but I have been doing wedding photography since the 5D came out. I have owned a 5D, a 1DIIN a, a 1DsII, a 1DIII, 1DIV and a 5D3. The camera that has remained is the 5Dc, I am in two minds as to wether or not to keep the 5DIII.
I routinely shoot dungeons and grotty receptions.
So the above should tell you that I am either a complete moron or the 5D has qualities that make it photographically excellent, even in challenging light.
All I can tell you is that I have used first the 5D, then the 5D2 & 1Ds3 and then the 1Ds3 and 5D3 for the same type and styles of work (mainly location industrial, comercial and business portraits) and the newer models have performed incrementally better, as you'd expect.
morganb4 wrote:
^^ yeah, thats what I read. Seems like you are saying they cant compete with todays cameras but I have been doing wedding photography since the 5D came out. I have owned a 5D, a 1DIIN a, a 1DsII, a 1DIII, 1DIV and a 5D3. The camera that has remained is the 5Dc, I am in two minds as to wether or not to keep the 5DIII.
I routinely shoot dungeons and grotty receptions.
So the above should tell you that I am either a complete moron or the 5D has qualities that make it photographically excellent, even in challenging light.
You must be a moron then.
Just kidding of course.
I shoot my 5D at ISO3200 regularly, but not a lot for wedding photography. You never know which image makes it to that large page spread. Still I have made some spreads from the 5D at ISO3200 using careful (ETTR) exposures.
dhphoto wrote:
All I can tell you is that I have used first the 5D, then the 5D2 & 1Ds3 and then the 1Ds3 and 5D3 for the same type and styles of work (mainly location industrial, comercial and business portraits) and the newer models have performed incrementally better, as you'd expect.
If you put it that way, I completely agree with you. Never used the 1Ds3 but have used all three 5D models.
dhphoto wrote:
[...] and the other cameras are all profiled so the differences are insignificant
I think this is the key to the colour issues. My guess is that only a limited number of dSLR owners even know how to make profiles for cameras. In my opinion you can't complain about colour (or say the 5D has "better" colour) if you haven't at least tried to do something about it.
Edit: Reading this back I must clarify: if after profiling you still think one camera has better colours than the other, then you can righfully say it has.
dhphoto wrote:
Not sure if that was to me but I'll answer
I have never tried a 1D3 and the other cameras are all profiled so the differences are insignificant
Uh, yeah sorry, it was. I'm profiled too, I did it when I got the 5D3 and the 1DIV. Saw a small improvement in skin tones.
When Im shooting the MkIV and 5D3 do the heavy lifting as they acquire better and the noise is good. but I look forward to processing the 5D files as I still stand by the contrast and color, especially the greens. I cant seem to get a good greens out of the others, they just seem to be too yellowed, profiled or not.
. PM me if interested. 
