Any Other 5D MKII Owners Feel A Bit Cheated?

[soundhound]

I think I'd be at least a _little_ bit satisfied if they had a significant firmware upgrade to the 5D MK II that incorporates at least _some_ of the things in the 7D.......wishing......hoping........

[Dallasphotog]

I guess the image quality and full frame sensor of the 5D MKII are going to continue to make me happy with that body. Personally, I feel like adding the 7D next year for sports, but I suspect the 1D MKIV will be close...


I suspect all the cool stuff on the 7D will end up on theMKIV, plus weather sealing, plus some crazy frame rate, plus, plus...

[lculpin]

I was actually planning on picking up a 5DII, but now I'm not so sure.... the 7D has a LOT of tempting features, but no FF is also a big bummer. I've been going nuts trying to figure out which one to go after... then again, if they have a sweet deal on either of them at PSWorld this month then maybe I'll just let that decide for me :P

[Daniel Browning]

Anybody else feel a bit cheated that Canon didn't include the new AF and other features (dual processors etc) that are in the 7D, into the 5D MKII?

No. On one level, I am a little annoyed that margins are all out of proportion with cost. (Nikon uses megapixels to justify a $3,000 premium of the D3X over the D3, where as Canon uses other features to justify a $3,500 premium of the 1Ds3 over the 5D2.) But even taking that into consideration, there isn't any grounds to feel cheated, because in order for me to have purchased it, I must have found the value sufficient.

If Canon claimed the 5D2 had an improved AF, dual digic, etc., and I later found out it wasn't true, then I would feel cheated. But I knew about its features before I bought it.

I don't know if they were too anxious to get the 5D MK II to the market or what,

I hope they were. It had been three years since the 5D, and I was sick of waiting. []

but personally, I wish they would have waited if they needed to in order to include the 7D's AF system, dual processors, artificial horizon etc, etc into the 5D MKII.

The 5D2 frame rate is limited by mechanics. Wear and tear is something like the cube of the speed of the two parts. If the 5D2 (4 FPS) was as fast as the 7D (8 FPS), that's 16 times more wear and tear. That means Canon would have to build it 16 times better, or it will break 16 times sooner.

Furthermore, the mechanical frame rate is affected by the size of the mirror. Vibration goes up with the fourth power of mirror height. That gives the 5D2 five times more vibration at the same frame rate, another source of engineering difficulty.

It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy.

[soundhound]

Good point about the shutter - something I've not realized. Let me be clear - I am very, very satisfied with my 5D MKII: it takes stunning images. I guess there's just something in the back of my mind that wishes that the 7D's features were also in the 5D MKII, even if I personally don't have use for them much.


My occupation is in the professional and consumer audio industry, and it's almost weekly change in technologies is frustrating. Maybe I'm naive in hoping that camera technology would be somewhat "stable". I guess that thinking is so "last-week!". In the early 1970s, I bought a Canon TL 35mm camera while I was in the Army, and it still works fine (providing I can find film for it!).


Oh well.......


Thanks everybody for putting up with my rant!

[Julius]

You have a great camera in the 5D MII....just enjoy it.

[Maleko]

I'd have a 5DMKII over a 7D any day! Stop worrying, the 5DMKII is damn awesome!


So it doesn thave some new bit and pieces that the NEWER 7D has, but thats because its NEWER, hell, I'm sure people who brought the 400D were well annoyed when the 450D came out so soon after! lol

[Feanor]

The 5D2 frame rate is limited by mechanics. Wear and tear is something like the cube of the speed of the two parts. If the 5D2 (4 FPS) was as fast as the 7D (8 FPS), that's 16 times more wear and tear. That means Canon would have to build it 16 times better, or it will break 16 times sooner.

Furthermore, the mechanical frame rate is affected by the size of the mirror. Vibration goes up with the fourth power of mirror height. That gives the 5D2 five times more vibration at the same frame rate, another source of engineering difficulty.

It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

I was thinking about this the other day while looking at Nikon gear out of curiosity. I don't really understand how you can say that the mechanics are the limiting factor to framerate on the 5DII when the D700, which is also full-frame and therefore has the same physical limits, is capable of such fast framerates. Now since the cameras cost about the same it could be said that Canon, instead of spending money on the mechanics of a fast shutter speed, have spent money on a higher resolution sensor. And that this sensor would also need far a far more powerful processor to compete with the D700's shutter speed.


But, to me, this is a question of emphasis - rather than limits. I think this might be what you were saying but I originally read your post as saying that it would be prohibitively difficult to design a full-frame mirror that can move that fast. The point is that the D700 is also a compromise - because they have compromised on the resolution of the sensor.


So it comes down to cost, rather than mechanics - not to mention Canon's desire to ensure to ensure that the people still buy the 1D series cameras (I believe many Nikonains don't see any point in spending the extra cash on the D3).


And so, IMO, the question of whether we really want 21MP in a camera or whether we'd have preferred the same emphasis of functionality as the D700 remains.

[musickna]

I have both cameras - the 5D II and the 7D. The 5D II gives me slightly better image quality plus full frame capability. The 7D gives me better focusing options and a faster frame rate. Yes, it would have been nice to see the 7D's focusing features on the 5D II, but that would put the camera close to the 1D range and I suspect Canon deliberately chose to keep their top line cameras - and their price tags - in a class by themselves.


I do not personally feel hard done by. I like the 7D's ergonomics and general usability better than that of the 5D II, but it's not a deal breaker by any means. The two cameras compliment each other very well. I could have waited, added the price tags together, and gone for a 1D IV, but I'm happy to have the two bodies plus the use of my existing EF-S lenses on the 7D.

[Daniel Browning]

I was thinking about this the other day while looking at Nikon gear out of curiosity. I don't really understand how you can say that the mechanics are the limiting factor to framerate on the 5DII when the D700, which is also full-frame and therefore has the same physical limits, is capable of such fast framerates.

As I think you surmised, there are two separate issues here:

• What limits the frame rate of the 5D2? (Answer: slow mechanical parts.)
• Why have slow mechanical parts in the 5D2? (Answer: marketing strategy.)

I was commenting principally on the former, but I'll discuss the latter now.

Now since the cameras cost about the same it could be said that Canon, instead of spending money on the mechanics of a fast shutter speed, have spent money on a higher resolution sensor. And that this sensor would also need far a far more powerful processor to compete with the D700's shutter speed.

My guess is that's what the manufacturers want us to think, but I'm not sure if it's really the case.

I think this might be what you were saying but I originally read your post as saying that it would be prohibitively difficult to design a full-frame mirror that can move that fast.

I hinted at what I thought was the reason when I said "It would be nice if Canon came out with an answer to Nikon's D700, but it would be a real change in pricing strategy." In other words, I think the reason why the 5D2 lacks fast mechanical parts is due to pricing strategy (specifically, margin maximization through product differentiation).

Let me illustrate the difference in strategy between Nikon and Canon. The Nikon D3X ($8000) has the exact same body and features as the D3 ($5,000); you pay $3,000 more just to get more megapixels. Nikon wants you to think that it costs $3,000 for the resolution.

The Canon 1Ds3 (around $6,700 at the time of the 5D2 introduction?) has the exact same resolution as the 5D2 ($2,700); you pay $4,000 more to get a better body (autofocus, build, etc.). Canon wants you to think that it costs $4,000 for all those features.

See the conflict there? I think the reality is that neither of those features cost anywhere near $3k or $4k -- they just need an excuse to capitalize on photographers that can afford high margins. The fact that they chose different excuses proves (according to my limited understanding) that they're both bogus.

Of course, if you're not in that high-margin category, you might actually appreciate that Canikon are doing it this way. By exploiting higher margins from the $8k buyers, they can offer cheaper cameras to the rest of the customers. (Kind of light progressive tax.) The downside is that everyone loses access to those features which would have been cheap to implement in low-end cameras if they weren't used for product differentiation.

I'm hoping that eventually Canikon will start using features I don't care about to differentiate their high-margin products. They could give the $3,000 cameras all the important features (body, autofocus, resolution, etc.), and try to fool the rich folks with some useless feature, like "platinum-coated alloy results in better autofocus" or something. I'm not holding my breath, though.