Define low light. Indoor light? They are most certainly useable, however you need to point them at something with some degree of contrast. D700 Pitch black dark alleys lit by a lamp post? No. The D700 would focus in those (I sold it for 5d II). D700 would focus in low contrast areas well... 5d II won't... but it depends on whether you shoot in REALLY dark environments IMO.
orangefirefish wrote:
Yes- but the 5D II will be used in more situations than an MF body.
Well, a heck of a lot of portrait and wedding photographers moved to the 5D and 5D2 from medium format cameras, and compared to a medium format camera, the 5D is amazingly agile, responsive, and tough.
If the 5D does nothing more than take a big bite out of the Mamiya market--which it has certainly done--I suspect that makes Canon very happy.
Well the 5D II is a BETTER camera than the 5D, and the 5D at the end of the day delivers superb IQ and AF in one shot, even in low light is good to very good. To me the biggest flaw of the 5D is the pathetic lcd screen and AI servo, which is piss poor in all no 1 series anyway. 5D II fixes a few of these weaknesses and adds many new features. I can easily overlook the AF in this camera, but hey add a D700 pro AF system, make it 7fps, inbuilt gps, flash controller, more sealing and you have the perfect camera.
I'll be getting a 5D II for sure, hopefully in the next month or two.
David, I hope you are right, but I doubt you are.
Canon have established this pattern for a long time now.
They really want us to pay $8000 if we want pro AF with a full frame sensor.
Quality control is pretty ordinary also.
Although I think they intentionally send out cameras with slight faults thinking most buyers of this level camera won't notice.
I've sent two bodies back.
Hoping for third time lucky on the 5D MK II.
Does the 5d2 have the Banding with AI Servo like the original 5d had? I know Canon claims it only happens with certain lenses, but it pretty much happens on all of them. Some worse than others. Especially when you try higher ISOs (800 and up).
I'm not sure if it's to do with the sensitivity or the non-cross nature?
As I explained above, it's the non-cross nature. If you turn the camera so that the rectangle is perpendicular to linear contrast in the subject, those peripheral points are every bit as accurate as the center point with lenses slower than f/2.8.
Quality control is pretty ordinary also.
Although I think they intentionally send out cameras with slight faults thinking most buyers of this level camera won't notice.
There is always a certain percentage of error permitted in nearly all quality control systems, and the less error permitted the higher the cost...exponentially.
RDKirk wrote:
There is always a certain percentage of error permitted in nearly all quality control systems, and the less error permitted the higher the cost...exponentially.
RDKirk wrote:
As I explained above, it's the non-cross nature. If you turn the camera so that the rectangle is perpendicular to linear contrast in the subject, those peripheral points are every bit as accurate as the center point with lenses slower than f/2.8.
True... but there is more to it... The AF point in the VF represents a much larger area than you can see in the VF.
