gdanmitchell wrote:
It is true that I have not used that camera, but I also acknowledge that it is a fine camera and has improved on the 5D2. I'm speaking to a more general observation, and I've used enough cameras, lenses, and other things to understand the general point rather well.
Generalizations are not always bad things, nor are they always necessarily inaccurate or uninformed. :-)
Indeed. Though to read some forums you would imagine that a) this, that, or the other camera is divinely perfect and worth any price, or b) all cameras suck.
Cameras have never been, are not, and never will be perfect. They continue to improve incrementally (not "night and day"), which is a fine thing, but model to model improvements never have the effect on our work that the marketing machine and forum hype might lead us to hope for. Fortunately things other than having the newest shiny thing are far more important to the quality and success of our work.
Dan -- You are betting on red, and at the same time betting on black.
Really, you should make an effort to use the gear that you are commenting on. How can you "Acknowledge that it is a fine camera and has improved on the 5D2" ? Get CPS to loan you one, then give us your comparison.
Jefferson -- This is awesome! You are quoting yourself (for me?)? Ha-ha! I love it!
Form -- I may not agree with you on this topic, but I appreciate that you tried the camera, put it though its paces, and you're honestly reporting your reactions based on your actual working methods. Same for corndog.
I've been fortunate in that each (Canon) camera upgrade has satisfied me and improved my photography -- some more than others.
form wrote:
Just because something costs much, much more...doesn't make it much better. I know this, and responses like I get for similar posts remind me of that often-occurring pattern of people thinking things are good just because they cost a lot. It's sticker-pride, something especially common among Mac computer users...
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
Why would anyone buy a camera for more than $ 3k if they don't like it ? Or not belive it's better than the old medel they already own ?
I've bought cameras for more than that amount that I did not like.
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
Why would anyone buy a camera for more than $ 3k if they don't like it ?
Because they don't know they don't like it until they buy it and use it for a while?
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
...Or not belive it's better than the old medel they already own ?
Maybe once they've bought it and used it they have to honest with themselves and admit if it isn't better than the old model, rather than deluding themselves just because they paid a lot of money for it.
I paid $2500 for it, wasn't willing to pay $3k+ so I didn't.
6d isn't an option because I need the pc sync port, the faster sync speed does make a difference, the focus array is narrower than what I intentionally upgraded for, and that 1/4000 sec max shutter would definitely become an inconvenience on days like yesterday during the bright, sunny times.
I have to have stuff that can handle my work demands, and the 6d lacks important parts I need.
Either buy a 1DX or learn to understand that no camera is perfect. If auto focus is what you need then you need to buck up and buy the best AF system available. And true to form, your response will be that you can't afford a 1DX, that canon owes you a perfect AF camera at what you perceive is the right price. If your missing "The Shot", then how can you can not buy the best tool available.
On the other hand, Canon has been known for producing low-mid-higher-end cameras which were just barely able to focus the $75 50/1.8 Mk2 accurately, so that the lens got a reputation of being bad AF performer. However, when you put that $75 lens on that $4000 1D, miraculouly the plastic fantastic became reliable AF performing lens. That situation, IMO, was somewhat appaling.
Seems to me the 5D2 and 5D3 are almost different types of camera.
The slow FPS, simple focusing system and lack of dual card slots make the 5D2 less good for action and more geared to things that don't move too much (not that they can't be used for sport)
But the 5D3 is much faster, with much better more advanced focusing, better suited for a wider range of stuff.
But up to about 1600 ISO the RAW output is incredibly similar, it's only at high ISO that the 5D3 pulls away.
The fact the 5D3 exists doesn't render the 5D2 obsolete, it just provides another model of camera perfectly suited to different things and makes the 5D2 cheaper.
I'm amazed. My wedding photography is actually better because of this camera, but maybe I push it a lot more than you do?
And no it's not sticker pride or anything equally stupid. Why do people do that - others have a different view so they come up with a silly reason for the difference.
PhilDrinkwater wrote:
I'm amazed. My wedding photography is actually better because of this camera, but maybe I push it a lot more than you do?
And no it's not sticker pride or anything equally stupid. Why do people do that - others have a different view so they come up with a silly reason for the difference.
Was that in reply to me Phil?
If so you are quite right, I don't often use my 5D2 off a tripod so the 5D3 advantages aren't as apparent but when I do shoot social stuff the 5D3 is way better
The actual IQ between the 2 & 3 is really very similar though, don't you think?
form wrote:
I paid $2500 for it, wasn't willing to pay $3k+ so I didn't.
6d isn't an option because I need the pc sync port, the faster sync speed does make a difference, the focus array is narrower than what I intentionally upgraded for, and that 1/4000 sec max shutter would definitely become an inconvenience on days like yesterday during the bright, sunny times.
I have to have stuff that can handle my work demands, and the 6d lacks important parts I need.
First he cried that no money to buy 5D3 if you are photographer: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1206685/0
Than he suddenly got 5D3 and now he is crying that it is not as good Maybe you just need to compare specs before you cry next time? Very provocative thread in my opinion ...
Everyone has a right to an opinion without being blasted....I appreciate the opinions of all either way but opinions are not wrong, they may just be different than yours. I like my 5D2 and I like my Rebel T4i but I no longer shoot weddings or any fast moving things other than my grandaughter and grandson. I have tried the 5D3 and probably will buy one when the price comes down more and the model is older. It is a better camera but for me, not an option at this time.
Whats that saying? The weakest point of a camera system is located 6 inches behind... or something like that... Not getting better results from a massively improved AF system? back to school, maybe? I don't take drugs or drink much.
Archive 2013 · 5d3...not much better than 5d2.
Maybe you just need to compare specs before you cry next time? Very provocative thread in my opinion ...