splathrop
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #2 · 5d3...not much better than 5d2. | |
Real improvements (and suspected improvements) that matter to some, maybe not all:
1. Autofocus and tracking of moving targets, day and night better. 5D 3 is a legitimate sports camera contender, or for birds in flight. 5D 2 was a non-contender. With the 5D 3 you can stand at the end of a long-jump pit, turn the camera vertical and choose a focus point near the top of the screen, and get multiple shots of the jumper coming at you in the air, all with the face in great focus, like sitting for a portrait. Not possible with the 5D 2.
2. Focus management improvements. Flexibility in choosing modes and focus points which can notably speed up the way you work in fast moving situations. Also, the selective focus, single point mode seems far more selective than on the 5D 2. I have shots of a song sparrow that was in a tree 20 feet away, completely framed by a looping foreground branch that left almost no space around the bird, left, right, or top. The 5D 3 and 70-200 II with Extender 1.4 nailed focus on the bird again and again. I could never have done that with the 5D 2.
3. Much more usable ISO 400-800. Haven't seen this noted by others, so maybe I'm peculiar about this one. For big prints (>30-inches) I would never use higher than ISO 200 on 5D 2, now with 5D 3 ISO 400 or ISO 640, depending on how much light is available. Rarely feel any need to go below ISO 400 with 5D 3 unless I am trying to keep shutter speed down because I prefer a wide aperture for the shot.
4. Quiet shutter. Even if it had no practical advantage, the aesthetic gain is highly welcome. Why someone who shoots wedding, events, or portraits wouldn't be grateful for that I can't imagine.
5. Improved frame rate.
6. Better organized menus, with more flexibility for custom configuration.
7. Is it just me, or does the rear LCD seem to work better. On 5D 2 I never trusted that I could judge focus (after the shot—live view with magnification is great for manual focus on both cameras) using the LCD. For many situations I can do that with 5D 3. I also think the live view on the 5D 3 does a better job (brighter) showing focus with the lens stopped down manually to check depth of field. Haven't tested, so YMMV.
8. I think the metering works better on 5D 3. In low-dynamic-range situations, or otherwise challenging lighting situations, I think I usually get wider histograms with the 5D 3 than with 5D 2. That could probably be tested, but I haven't done it. It's a subjective impression. I also think auto-white-balance is better.
9. I suspect that autofocus on the 5D 3 works better with certain later Canon lenses than it does on the 5D 2. My only relevant experience is with the 70-200 II, which definitely does focus better for me on the newer camera. Canon has noted those differences officially for some recent lenses (not the 70-200, AFAIK), but not for the whole lineup. Nevertheless, excellent 5D 3 implementation of MA may play a role. I was unhappy with my Extender 1.4 version 2 using the 5D 2, now I use it constantly. May be a MA implementation difference.
Edited on May 19, 2013 at 09:58 PM · View previous versions
|
Archive 2013 · 5d3...not much better than 5d2.
y high iso. (although the ML hack has revealed that the sensor is an almost infinite hardware improvement for video though)
!parc si 3D5 eht swonk enoyrevE