If anyone has a 5D M2 that they don't want, I will gladly take it off their hands with no complaints. I guess I am just a nice guy like that.
If anyone has a 5D M2 that they don't want, I will gladly take it off their hands with no complaints. I guess I am just a nice guy like that.
I think the 5dmk2 is absolutely flipping awesome. I loved the 5d and this model improves in every way. Plus it serves a very important need for me - simplicity. I tested out a 1dsmk3 a few weeks ago. No doubt someone really, truly NEEDS all the functionality of the 1-series camera but it just ain't me. There was too much stuff on that camera that got in the way of taking great photos. I do earn my entire living from photography and I photograph entirely on-location and I find the 5d line to be great - you can put it in Manual and it produces a huge, gorgeous file and I only need to worry about a few buttons. What more can I ask for - oh, and its cheaper than the mark1 was!
Really, I understand that everyone is different and we all like different things in our equipment. But are most pros really thinking about switching to whatever brand provides .02% better performance every month or so? Canon has always produced great stuff and whatever Nikon or Sony puts out doesn't change that. Certainly, folks can and should do what they like but I for one am blown away by the 5dmk2 and have no intereste or compelling reason to worry about what the other (admittedly great) companies are doing. I'd rather worry about growing my business!
If the d700, d3, 1dsmk3 and 5dmk2 all cost the same amount I'd personally go for the 5dmk2.
- trr
Todd Reichman:
I would like to know if the AF of the 5D2 is affecting you negatively at all. How do you use it? Only center point? In what shooting conditions? What kind of shoots? What is your opinion on the example of the fashion shooter and wedding shooter who got a lot of out of focus shots with the 5D2?
Originally Posted by KarelDonk
For my shoots, the 1d Mark III provided much better AF than the 5d2.
With just the center point in good light with an f/2.8 lens and a high contrast target, the 5d2 is pretty fast and I get a good amount of keepers. I get poor results if I use a slow lens, non-center AF points, low light, or low-contrast target. In those circumstances I try to shoot burstmode and bracket focus with the 5d2. The 1d3 in the same circumstances excelled. (I did not tend to use the 1d3 in the ways that caused everyone else to have problems).
The kind of shoots where I use AF is event photography such as weddings. I think a 1D autofocus system works much better in those circumstances.
Well what you describe there is some of why I have a problem with the 5D2. The focus system is very poor. Unless you want to use the center point all the time, but that is a problem for a lot of shooting situations. And what's even worse, is that not only are the outer AF points not very good and accurate, when you use them, the 5D2 can actually give you a focus confirmation when in fact, nothing is in focus. So you go on shooting thinking you got focus, and later you see that most of the shots are ruined because of the bad focus. This is quite frankly unacceptable for a pro user. I can't begin to image what I would do if I had this problem during a paid shoot and discover it later.
And then I say, you can have all the megapixels in the world in your camera, but with such an AF system, it wouldn't matter at all.
You know, while the 50D may not be revolutionary, it's certainly not a bad camera (and at the lower price these days, certainly worth a look). I love mine...and I paid the initial release price for it (and feel it's been worth every penny). It may not be a game-changer, but it's a solid piece of equipment in my opinion.
I photograph 100% weddings and I find the focusing spectacular. With the 5dmk1 I would use the off center points the vast majority of the time. I would only use the center point during the reception when flash + AF assist was necessary. I always select the center point before each shot and was generally happy with the results. With the mark2 I was able to use the off-center points even during the reception which was amazing. So I really can't complain at all - I'm thrilled with the focus. I do want to point out in the interest of full disclosure that I couldn't complain nearly as much about the 5d focus as I've seen out there. Also, I used a 1dsmk3 for a few weeks recently and I don't think its any better than the 5dmk2, at least for what I do.
I'm all weddings and engagements and all on-location. I do a fair amount of PJ work with some fashion-inspired posed stuff thrown in. The camera does everything exactly the way I want, center point, off-center points, One shot and AI. It just works. Granted, I'm a bit of a Canon apologist and I tend to privately feel that folks that complain about Canon's focus don't know what they're doing! I hate to admit that but I've thought it more than once. Its just that I've never had a problem with my several thousand (tens of thousands?) dollars worth of Canon gear that wasn't my fault. I'm not saying that to dengrate anyone, just want to give my opinion some perspective.
thanks
- trr
Todd Reichman:
If you don't mind just a few more questions. How is your workflow? Do you view your files at the pixel level?
The reason why I ask is because even when the AF system does not perform well, if you view the images with focus issues at a small size, or if you view small prints of those images, they may appear sharp and in focus. If you look at the example of the fashion shooter and wedding shooter I mentioned in my blog post, the images which were not in focus appear to be in focus when viewed at a small size.
The problem will be noticible in large prints and when cropping.
I love my new 5D Mark II. I'm coming from a 30D and it's a world of difference.
- Vince
I will say in agreement of Karel's blog post that the 50D is a pretty clearly uninspiring camera and pretty unrevolutionary in the most negative way.
- trr
Posting Permissions
