Pixelpuffin wrote:
I used to have a 5D2, sold it when I got the 5diii. Later added the 6D and 6Dii also picked up a mintish 5dc.
Yet I’d like to try/compare the old 5dii once more. People say the colours are unique to that particular model.
Would you agree??
The 5D had the older colors like the 1Ds II. The 5D II not so much. It had a simplified sensor similar to the 1Ds III.
The 5D II had videos, but otherwise retained the awful AF system of the older cameras. The 5D III was much better all around and had the AF sensor from the 1DX though slower processors. However, it wasn't until the 2016 cameras that Canon finally improved manufcaturing tech for the sensors.
Most of those old cameras are at photonstophotos.net and you can see the improvements over the generations. https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201Ds%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV
I used to use a pair of them when they were new. It's a wonderful machine to this day, IMO, even saddled with an aggressive low-pass filter (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1942928/) and limited to a heavy crop for 4K video (not a problem for me).
Canon solved the 5-series AF performance for this model, and also maybe with the 5D3 / 5DS, but I never owned those bodies.
There is also still something to be said for optical viewfinders, IMO. (This is a less realized thing with the APS-C bodies, none of which had great viewfinders.)
I did have to spend an hour or two AF Micro-adjusting my EF lenses. I don't really miss that part of the DSLR era, haha.
garyvot wrote:
Although it hardly classifies as an "older DSLR", some of you may recall that I recently picked up a mint 5D Mark IV:
Canon solved the 5-series AF performance for this model, and also maybe with the 5D3 / 5DS, but I never owned those bodies.
I did have to spend an hour or two AF Micro-adjusting my EF lenses. I don't really miss that part of the DSLR era, haha.
AF progressed a little from 5D III to 5Ds/R (IIRC same sensor, but faster processor) and the 5D IV was a larger jump that allowed f/8 for more areas, but was not always reliable compared to f/5.6. 1DX II was faster with AF, but I usually preferred the 30MP over 20MP.
I was able to do about 48 calibration settings in a little more than 2 hours at the peak. The combination of extra rental bodies, extra lenses, TC, resulted is too many combinations. I don't miss that either, but it was well worth it for the 100-400 IS II, 500/4 IS II, 600/4 IS III, etc. I did not usually find issues with the wides and the midrange like 70-200 were mostly used on my personal bodieds, so calibrated less frequently. I was always amazed by those claiming calibration was not necessary. There were almost always some benefits with the big whites.
Jman13 wrote:
I picked up a 5D II a couple of weeks ago and I've been enjoying it quite a bit. Sure it's got some limitations compared to my current gear (Nikon Z5 II), but I picked up some good but somewhat affordable used glass for it, (16-35/4L, 24-105 STM and 70-300L), and it's a great kit. I may eventually add a 5D IV if I can find a clean, low mileage copy for a reasonable price (the majority of those I see for sale are VERY high shutter counts, or quite expensive). It's not going to become my primary gear, but the 5D II feels amazing in the hand, and the files look great if you expose properly.
I also got a Fringer EF-Z adapter that works quite well so I can also use the EF lenses on my mirrorless bodies.
I also have a 30D and Digital Rebel for nostalgia sake since they are so dirt cheap (paid $100 for both of them combined), with a 15-85 in addition to the EF glass. I sold my 7D and other EF-S lenses since they won't get use now that I have the 5D II for when I want to take a DSLR out for a spin. (they paid for the majority of the 70-300L in trade at MPB). ...Show more →
Yeah I saw that one and it fits the bill. Unfortunately, now is not the time for me to be buying one. I hope a similar listing is available in a couple months time.
Jman13 wrote:
Yeah I saw that one and it fits the bill. Unfortunately, now is not the time for me to be buying one. I hope a similar listing is available in a couple months time.
I ran away from my 5d2 and Canon lenses to a much smaller / lighter A7R back over 10 years ago and have never looked back. I see zero reason to go backwards to a DSLR system.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Well I just received a used 60D that I scored off eBay for cheap.
I’ve been picking up these older bodies for the past 3-4yrs
Currently have the 30,40,50,70,80D and now the 60D
The 10 & 20D might be a little too primitive and the 90D is still a lot more than I’m wanting to pay
Spent all weekend playing with the 60D, came minus body cap but seller had taped over the mirror box 👍🏻
Language was Spanish and firmware was original
20mins after it had arrived I’d changed the language, updated the firmware, checked the sensor and got the shutter count (19,457)
The AF seems accurate enough
Loving the colours
Anyone else enjoying giving these old DSLR’s another run??...Show more →
YES!!!
I have made my "collection" of Canon dslr's filled with great deals on the 5DSR's. Bought 3 here within the last year.
I use them regularly with EF lenses. I have a Fuji MF GFX100s ii for mirrorless. But my "main" go to system is a slew of Canon dslrs. (1DsMKII, 5DSR's, 1Dx, 90D) I have a 90D..sold all my other "xxD" models to get up to the 90D. I LOVE the on board flash.
I have not seen a real difference between a good dslr image and a new "mirrorless" image enough to sell all my dslr stuff and go to the Canon mirrorless.
I LOVE high mpx Canon bodies...when they get one(R series) that incorporates the features I want..I will look to upgrade.
Dan
Danpbphoto wrote:
... I have a 90D..sold all my other "xxD" models to get up to the 90D. I LOVE the on board flash.
I was jealous when the 60D came out because it offered integrated flash Commander Mode (a Canon APS-C first). Even much later high-end cameras—like Nikon D4 and Sony A1—require body-attached accessories to gain control over deployed OEM flashes.
Danpbphoto wrote:
I have not seen a real difference between a good dslr image and a new "mirrorless" image enough to sell all my dslr stuff and go to the Canon mirrorless.
Mike_5D wrote:
Yeah but if you shoot anything that moves, mirrorless AF tracking makes it more likely that you'll get the shot and without cropping for composition.
Exactly. There's no argument that some of the DSLR sensors, especially in the mid-to-high tier camera lines, still produce stunning images by today's standards.
But I'll put me on my R5mk2 up against anyone shooting on an old DSLR for birds in flight, fast moving sports (especially ones where the R5mk2 is programmed to track in Action Priority, like basketball or soccer) and see which one of us has the higher keeper rates and successful subject tracking. And if I choose to enable pre-capture, face priority recognition, and high-burst shooting in e-shutter...it's light's out.
Even if the DSLR shooter is so highly skilled that they can keep up with my results, it will entail a lot of work and fast reaction time on their part, whereas the subject tracking, action priority and AF speeds on the R5mk2 is basically a cheat code. Once I've dialed in all the settings (and they're conveniently saved on a preset), once I've the target in my viewfinder, I've got the shot. My keeper rate is so high (in terms of nailing focus) that my culling protocol largely focuses on getting the shots with the best composition, and not simply culling because a significant portion of shots are out of focus.
If we're in a studio taking portraits, or outdoors doing static landscape shots, a DSLR absolutely holds its own against mirrorless.
Carlo_M wrote:
Exactly. There's no argument that some of the DSLR sensors, especially in the mid-to-high tier camera lines, still produce stunning images by today's standards.
But I'll put me on my R5mk2 up against anyone shooting on an old DSLR for birds in flight, fast moving sports (especially ones where the R5mk2 is programmed to track in Action Priority, like basketball or soccer) and see which one of us has the higher keeper rates and successful subject tracking. And if I choose to enable pre-capture, face priority recognition, and high-burst shooting in e-shutter...it's light's out.
Even if the DSLR shooter is so highly skilled that they can keep up with my results, it will entail a lot of work and fast reaction time on their part, whereas the subject tracking, action priority and AF speeds on the R5mk2 is basically a cheat code. Once I've dialed in all the settings (and they're conveniently saved on a preset), once I've the target in my viewfinder, I've got the shot. My keeper rate is so high (in terms of nailing focus) that my culling protocol largely focuses on getting the shots with the best composition, and not simply culling because a significant portion of shots are out of focus.
If we're in a studio taking portraits, or outdoors doing static landscape shots, a DSLR absolutely holds its own against mirrorless....Show more →
You are quite right
But that’s canons latest cutting edge technology at £3K or thereabouts
My used 60d was £60 quid !!
So I should certainly hope your R5 blows the 60d out of the water 🤣👍🏻
DSLR’s are no threat to mirrorless. All we are saying is they can still take nice pictures.
I think we're all in agreement. In controlled, relatively static environments with subjects that aren't fast moving, it's almost immaterial which you choose to shoot (DSLR/Mirrorless). In fact, at that point it's the glass that makes the most difference. I have some meh shots from my 7D when I used the kit lens, and some amazing shots when I rented the EF 70-200 f/2.8L for a wedding. The only way you can tell it's from the 7D is that it's 18MP vs. 45MP for the R5ii, but pic quality wise they look great even after 16 years (wedding was in 2010...man that feels weird to write that it ws 16 years ago, feels like yesterday).
Buy the tool that fits your needs. If it's a DSLR, more power to you!
Max10 wrote: Danpbphoto wrote:
Danpbphoto wrote:
I have not seen a real difference between a good dslr image and a new "mirrorless" image enough to sell all my dslr stuff and go to the Canon mirrorless.
Dan,
I find that hard to believe since you only have 104 Assignment wins with your old, outdated dslrs
Jim
Mike_5D wrote:
Yeah but if you shoot anything that moves, mirrorless AF tracking makes it more likely that you'll get the shot and without cropping for composition.
Right.
And while I enjoy shooting wildlife or sports action when I can, I would add that for a people photographer like me, it is the eye tracking in particular that makes mirrorless a step up.
With a camera like my 5D Mark IV and well calibrated 'L'-series lenses, it is certainly possible to make sharply focused portraits and candids of people in most situations.
But eye and subject tracking make it effortless to do this while recomposing, freeing up brain cells from worrying about which AF point is active. Plus, there is less worry about AF consistency, using even consumer-grade lenses or lenses having extremely wide apertures.
I would argue that mirrorless finally delivers on the "full promise" of autofocus technology.
Not that this needs to get in the way of enjoying a DSLR. Photography is as much about the process or journey as it is the result or destination.
And while I enjoy shooting wildlife or sports action when I can, I would add that for a people photographer like me, it is the eye tracking in particular that makes mirrorless a step up.
With a camera like my 5D Mark IV and well calibrated 'L'-series lenses, it is certainly possible to make sharply focused portraits and candids of people in most situations.
But eye and subject tracking make it effortless to do this while recomposing, freeing up brain cells from worrying about which AF point is active. Plus, there is less worry about AF consistency, using even consumer-grade lenses or lenses having extremely wide apertures.
I would argue that mirrorless finally delivers on the "full promise" of autofocus technology.
Not that this needs to get in the way of enjoying a DSLR. Photography is as much about the process or journey as it is the result or destination....Show more →
The big problem I had with DSLR AF was that all of the AF points, especially the ones that actually worked, were all clustered in the middle of the frame. To reliably track a moving subject required their head in the center of frame which isn't very good composition. So that meant shooting wide and cropping to improve composition. The R6 with its subject tracking lets me compose much better in-camera and crop a lot less, effectively increasing the megapixel count of the final product.
Mike_5D wrote:
Yeah but if you shoot anything that moves, mirrorless AF tracking makes it more likely that you'll get the shot and without cropping for composition.
---------------------------------------------
Carlo_M wrote:
Exactly. There's no argument that some of the DSLR sensors, especially in the mid-to-high tier camera lines, still produce stunning images by today's standards.
But I'll put me on my R5mk2 up against anyone shooting on an old DSLR for birds in flight, fast moving sports (especially ones where the R5mk2 is programmed to track in Action Priority, like basketball or soccer) and see which one of us has the higher keeper rates and successful subject tracking. And if I choose to enable pre-capture, face priority recognition, and high-burst shooting in e-shutter...it's light's out.
Even if the DSLR shooter is so highly skilled that they can keep up with my results, it will entail a lot of work and fast reaction time on their part, whereas the subject tracking, action priority and AF speeds on the R5mk2 is basically a cheat code. Once I've dialed in all the settings (and they're conveniently saved on a preset), once I've the target in my viewfinder, I've got the shot. My keeper rate is so high (in terms of nailing focus) that my culling protocol largely focuses on getting the shots with the best composition, and not simply culling because a significant portion of shots are out of focus.
If we're in a studio taking portraits, or outdoors doing static landscape shots, a DSLR absolutely holds its own against mirrorless....Show more →
I have not shot subjects that require "motion" so I amend my statement. Thanks for noting this guyz.
I forget about AF bif because I no longer shoot those subjects..
Need to rectify that this Fall-Winter.
I did shoot lax for 3 colleges here for 15 years with dslrs and AF and the results were "accepted" by those schools and local media.
I have a Fuji GFX MF mirrorless but have not attempted any "motion" requiring images.
Dan
