EOS 5D Woes

[Lounge Lizard]

Well, I spent a lot of time yesterday taking test shots with various lenses on the 5D at a range of apertures to see what happens. My conclusion is that the 5D does vignette badly wide open with most lenses, not just the 24-105, and still has vignetting apparent at f8. You might say why be bothered because the rest of the camera more than makes up for it but I shoot weddings wide-open in dimly-lit churches and if that means that many of my images require more work to correct them then that doesn't bode well for my workflow. Otherwise, this is a fine camera and capable of taking some really detailed pics (I posted a few samples of Cambridge yesterday).

The conclusion I am fast coming to echoes James' (Gen_bunty) comments - IIRC, he said that the 5D is not really up to being a full-frame camera and he returned his with the thought that he'd wait for the second generation semi-pro full-frame camera from Canon (the 3D?) where they would (hopefully) address the issue.

As I have so many images (too many to post here), I will create a web page showing the images I took. I guess that a 1Ds will be much better for a full-frame camera but I don't wish to spend that money or carry that bulk around.

So, what do I do now? I did like the larger screen and that made image review much better. Maybe I'll get a 30D and wait a bit longer...

[jchrisc]

David - that pretty much echos the views that I have expressed, but unlike you, I make little use of the camera wide open and so I decided to press on with it.

I am not convinced that there are significant differences between individual bodies (i.e. some kind of Q.C. problem) and it brings me back to the questions that I asked about the original AP review of this camera.

[Gen_bunty]

Hi David,

Well that echoes my thoughts and experience with the 5D. I will certainly be waiting eagerly to see if Canon address such issues with the next semi pro full frame.

For the moment, I am tempted by the 30D, also for the large screen.

So I guess this is the advantage of Jessops. You get 30 days to return the 5D and buy yourself a 30D. Maybe a 30D and the new 17-55 2.8 IS (once the price drops to something realistic for a non L lens - £799 at Parkcameras) would be a better bet.

Let us know how you get on and about the web link to those images.

James

[Lounge Lizard]

Thanks James.

I might consider a 30D with the 17-85 IS. It such that lenses bundled with the camera (my 5D and 24-105 were in their original cartons inside a bigger box) are such good value at Jessies. It works out at £290. So, I could always sell it for more thus subsidising the 30D or keep it for when I get round to getting a 350D as a holiday camera.

[finste]

Hi,

I afraid (happy?) my experience with the 5D is almost a mirror image of yours. Of all the lenses I have for my 5D only the 85F1.8 shows any sign of vignetting wide open and even then it is only visible with uniformly lit areas.

17-35F2.8L, 28-70F2.8L, 70-200F2.8L, 300F2.8L, 85F1.8, 100F2.8Macro

All of these lenses are at least 10 years old but lay unused for 5 years or more due to me doing an OU degree but I'm wondering if QC is now a significant problem with Canon products in general. I'm sure there must be pressure to get as much product out the door to meet demand as they possibly can. That pressure may not have been there during the age of film when Canon were not so dominant and hence the problem may not be so apparent with older higher end lenses.

It really is a crying shame about the 24-105. If it didn't vignette so much it would be an almost ideal lens.


Regards...
Steve

[Scphoto]

Its kinda putting me off getting one, though had a brief go and didn't notice anything. I'm going to give one a try with my camera (subject to jacobs letting me try it again) to check the results.

Is everyone happy with the 17-40L and 70-200L F4 lenses on the 5D?

[BigWill]

That is very disappointing, but not entirely unexpected (given previous poor reports), news David. It seems Canon have made a major "faux pas" with this camera and it's just not up to the standards you would normally expect from such a reputable company. For a camera which costs such a large amount of money too this is doubly disappointing. Perhaps the holy grail of full frame digital cannot be obtained at a "budget" cost and Canon, in their efforts to provide such a camera in such a price bracket, have for once taken their eye off the ball and let standards slip. A camera which vignettes is simply not acceptable in any shape or form never mind at this price bracket and the 5D has done no favors to Canon's reputation and I think will make prospective future purchasers of their products more wary of purchasing on reputation only from now on.

So it's to be a 30D until Canon can get their act together then? Well at least the 20D was a proven performer and the additional tweaks the 30D provide should make it even more worthwhile.

BigWill

[TimF]

Sorry to hear that David. This is, I suppose, the inevitable consequence of the digital revolution.

In the days of film SLRs, a company would avoid having a cheaper mousetrap undermining its more expensive models by deleting or downgrading certain features - eg, lower top shutter speed, lower flash sync speed, lower frames per second rate, slower AF, no mirror lock-up, no spot metering etc. Obviously this can still be done now, but with image quality now an integral part of the camera rather than being dependant on whatever film you put in, it allows another area to cut costs in, and to give them their due, Canon would be foolish to provide image quality equal in every way to the 1Ds II on the 5D.

Would it be possible to get round this by using a centre ND filter? Or is it down to the design of the micro-lenses on the chip.

[Lounge Lizard]

Saw manager at Jessies this afternoon. He was surprised to hear of my concerns. I left a CD of test images with him to print. Will go back tomorrow. He has another body and is willing to do a swap. I'll see what tomorrow brings.

I'll see if I can get examples online later tonight.

[BigWill]

Will be interested to see if it's just a "one off" with your particular example or if there is a general design flaw. I'm not optomistic though as the evidence so far seems to point to a general design flaw but I await your tests with intrest David.

BigWill

[sofinetti]

First,I am sorry hearing you're not happy with your new 5D.I was proud about this camera,though I don't own it but being in the same "team",Canon DSLR products well known for their hig ISO performance,DR and detail.
I've got just one question about this,is there the same bad vigneting ,with 24-105 or other lens that's reported to vignettes strong on 5D, on a 35mm film body or on a 1D body?
Isn't it the same "35x24mm" area and the same sensor/frame plan , the same distance between the lens and the plan of sensor/film frame? I think it should be absolutely the same,so where from comes this strong vigneting?

[Bettina]

I think that there's always some vignetting but with APS sensor sizes it's less obvious as they tend to use the centre of the lenses. I think the test is not between a 10D and a 5D but, really between a full frame DSLR and it's film equivalent. Also, if you're aware of it, there's lots of scope to get rid of it either in PSCS2 RAW or in its lens correction filter.

As regards weight, I held a 5D in my hand the other day - with battery grip. I found the weight very similar to the 1Ds.

[Lounge Lizard]

Also, if you're aware of it, there's lots of scope to get rid of it either in PSCS2 RAW or in its lens correction filter.

Not so. The vignetting is the same from side-to-side but not the same from top-to-bottom. So, using the correction tools, it is possible to remove the top vignetting but it over-corrects in the bottom half of the frame. Now I might be able to combine two layer and do different vignetting on each but why should I have to go to so much trouble and when processing 100 images shot in low light in a church, this is a definite no-no.

[LenShepherd]

When I field tested the 1DS Mk II I got what I consider too much vignetting - from reports I trust (like BJP) I concluded it was the technology i.e. sensors and wide open with full frame digital with many lenses mean lots of work.
Apparently the vignetting is not as severe as with the 5D. Even so for hotel room interiors where the lower room corners often have low levels of illumination I found it all too easy to loose too much detail to get a workable image.
For this type of work I continue to shoot 24x36 with a film body. Such sales figures I have seen indicate even with it's much discounted price the 5D has yet to achieve 1% of the DSLR market by number of bodies sold. By comparison the 30D and Nikon's D200 are selling far better. Whilst price comes into it I suspect the 5D has not been the market break through Canon hoped it would be.

[Lounge Lizard]

I'd certainly hope that 1Ds MkII would be better. For my purposes, I buy quality L glass to be used wide-open in low light situations, and that's where the 5D is bad. Maybe a 1D might be a better bet for me as it is 1.3x.

I liked the idea of the 5D because of the larger viewfinder and larger LCD - both of these are in the 1D MkII but I don't fancy the size or price. Maybe a 30D with bigger LCD might be a compromise.

[Les_McLean]

A couple of points, firstly it must be a huge disappointment to find these flaws in a camera you had high hopes for, let's hope a replacement body doesn't have these.

A few of my friendsa have 5D's, and have had no mention of vignetting, however, they rarely shoot wide open, so probably not surprising.

Unlike Len , I don't find too much vignetting on a 1Ds MKII, slight on a 24-105 at F4, very slight on a 17-40, 17-35 and a sigma 12-34mm.

I came to the conclusion on the 24-105, while not perfect, I could live with the vignetting, it's rare I shoot wide open , and if I ever did, PS could take care of it.

Hope you keep us posted on this continuous saga .

Les

http://www.lesmclean.co.uk/

[Lounge Lizard]

Just to add some substance to my observations, here are some samples:

17-40/f4L at 17mm and f4


17-40/f4L at 17mm and f8


24-105/f4L at 24mm and f4


24-105/f4L at 24mm and f8


28-70/f2.8L at 28mm and f2.8


28-70/f2.8L at 28mm and f8


70-200/f2.8L at 70mm and f2.8


70-200/f2.8L at 200mm and f2.8


70-200/f2.8L at 200mm and f8


I trust your eyes will see what my eyes observe...

[Scphoto]

It does look a bit duff on those pics. Hopefully i'll be able to try the first 2 lenses tomorrow on my 5D. It would be interesting to see the results.

[BigWill]

Good lord that's dreadfull! You'd get better results with a Zenit 35mm with a half decent lens! Canon certaily have a neck on them to ask such an outrageous price for such an outrageously bad camera! I'm shocked!

BigWill

[Lounge Lizard]

Well let's see if I have a bad example when I get my hands on another body.