EOS 5D Woes

[Benchista]

Although I cannot respond in an 'official' capacity I would largely concur with your suspicions regarding 'variability' in cameras - a friend and I almost came to blows after I recommended the 5D and the one she got exhibited severe vignetting. She's on her third body and it's an entirely different camera (ie no vignetting...)
I sense a discussion with the 'big C' is imminent...

Thanks for the response Chris. So (off the record ) is it your opinion that the vignetting that is being reported with the 5D body and 24-105mm lens (at 24mm) is more likely to be due to variability of the 5D body rather than variability of the 24-105mm lens?

This is important because if an individual buys a 5D/24-105 kit and they don't have access to another full frame body then he or she has no means of determining whether the 'fault' lies with the body or the lens. Also, in my case, I am using the 24-105mm lens on a cropped-sensor 30D body (and have long since sold my Canon 35mm film SLRs) and so have no means of testing the lens for vignetting issues.

Terry.

Terry, look at Les' experience with the 24-105 - it is my firm belief that there is variability in both lens and camera, and that there are two choices if you want a 5D/24-105 combo - don't buy it, or keep on trying until you get one of each you're happy with.

I know I've stated that I'm 100% sure that there are non-vignetting examples about and have been unable to produce any evidence - well, my first piece of evidence is that I've got 100% confidence in Chris Gatcum, and the rather more tangible evidence is in the form of RAW files from two different cameras belonging to two pro 'togs in the US. I have not got their permission to post any of their images here, or even to distribute them onwards, so unless and until they change their minds, I'm afraid that's all I can say. Suffice it to say that I'm still personally in the market for a 5D, but I am indeed not happy at the prospect of having to do QC for Canon - however, I personally consider it worthwhile for the superb quality that the camera can produce, and the prospect of not having to upgrade for a VERY long time afterwards.

[jchrisc]

I sense a discussion with the 'big C' is imminent...

Part of the problem in all of this, is the difficulty of sustaining a dialogue with Canon. If you manage somehow to get an email into their almost impenetrable structure they reply with a "it's not good replying to this address" type email. They supply a link for a further enquiry i.e. you have to start all over again, but even that link expires and becomes unusable the following day.

I have never met a firm that made it so difficult to talk to them.

[alanS]

"On the other side of the coin, it does suggest that Canon sees issues with full-frame such that it continues to put effort into developing lenses for APS-C size sensors."

Indeed David,

My point is that a machine works best with components most fit for the task. In the case of cameras I'd humbly suggest that the properties and characteristics of digital and film bodies (and similar types from different manufacturers) differ and would be best used with lenses designed specifically for those properties or characteristics. There is no universally accepted standard after all. If we try to use components which are not specifically designed for the task then subtle issues may arise.

Anyway, sorry to intrude.

[Lounge Lizard]

...a machine works best with components most fit for the task. In the case of cameras I'd humbly suggest that the properties and characteristics of digital and film bodies (and similar types from different manufacturers) differ and would be best used with lenses designed specifically for those properties or characteristics.

I quite agree. So tell me, Alan - what lenses from Canon's range do you recommend I use with a full-frame digital SLR?

[rephoto]

I shoot with a 1ds and have experienced the full horror of vignetting in the coreners. That said it is only really pronounced on what one might call the super-fast lenses (i.e 50 1.4) and tends to disappear by f2.5

I think it is a the trade off that you have to accept when buying a full frame dslr and it may be some time before the appropriate R&D is invested into completely solving this issue.

Another factor worth noting, and I am just guesing here, is that a fair amount of the canon glass on the market was not designed with the DSLR in mind nad has been in production, in some cases, for over a decade. Once these lenses have been redesigned we may see an improvement in the performance of th 5D. Then again, we might not. It may just be one of the charaacteristics of DSLRs that we have to get used to.

Out of curiousity, a bit of a wild card, but I know quite a few people use contax to eos adapters to run Zeiss glass on their canon bodies, largely because of Canon's weakness in its wideangle range. Does anyone know if the zeiss superfast lenses exhibit the same vignetting?

[John_Hine]

I read the above comments and was fascinated. I also had a bit of a "could have told 'em so" moment. A company that creates a full-frame digital camera is practically implying that buyers can happily use the lenses they bought for their film cameras. However, I understand from my reading of Ap etc. that film lenses do not emit light in lines that are parallel enough to suit a flat sensor. The corners of the image are therefore going to suffer. The possible answers are: a) give up any idea of using the same lenses for film and full-frame digital (so maybe just forget full-frame digital) or b) design a sensor that suits the light emission pattern of film lenses. It would have to be part-spherical rather than totally flat. Is that a big problem? Apparently Leica have taken a timid step in this direction with the skewed photo-sites in the corners of their Digi Module's sensor (but rather weird product is not full-frame, of course).

[SteveEM]

Hi all,

David...I think you are up the creek mate. It seems If you want a 5D, or any other Canon Full frame DSLR to work 'properly' with all lenses at all apertures, then you need to do Canon's QC for them, as it seems they are not doing it themselves. I really hope Mr Gatcum or anyone else can get some official line from a Canon rep, but If they make it virtually impossible for anyone to e-mail them, that tells me they do not care a fig about customer service...so I am not holding my breath. I hope AP pursues this MUCH further.

I remember being quite shocked when I read the AP test of the 5D, because shortly before I read the 'Professional Photographer' magazine review and they clearly brought up the vignetting issue, which they spotted during testing, so I was expecting AP to spot it also...but apparently not....and yes I am aware this issue has existed with film cameras for ages, but it seems Canon DSLR's have taken it to an new level of unacceptability...

Cheers Steve.

[radim]

I'm really fed up with 5D.

David, as I've promised I've got test. Problem is that it's from different body that I've tested earlier this week. They've already sold it (don't wonder why). Difference? Devastating! Viewfinder looks worse that my old Praktica MTL 5 - full of dust, threads, and some rubbish. It was really hard to say what's the focusing point and what is not!

And test result? (It was problem to find some light and regular surface)

24mm/f4


84mm/f4 (space problem)


As you can see it's disaster. Even from LCD I knew there's really strong vignetting. f/8 results are very similar to these earlier published on this thread.

I really do regret I didn't saved results from first body. But trust me I've tried good 5D body this week.

My advice? Wait for 5D upgrade or be pretty sure you can test body before buying.

Radim

[Gen_bunty]

Well Canon are really getting a bad track record IMHO with QC at the moment. They have had the 24-105 flare problem which they recalled for. The 70-300 IS problem that they are going to start recalling and what is starting to look like a 5D problem. I thought it was just a design fault, but with varied reports of vignetting, I wonder more about QC.

From my experience of 1 body, the 5D is simply not up to the job even with a lens that we assume was designed with the idea of full frame in mind (24-105). Is the 24-105 not a new design ? If not, why the hell do they bundle it with a full frame camera ?

OK, so maybe the older L lenses need a redesign, but please explain to me Canon why you sell an L lens with a 5D when it clearly vignets at F8. I don't call F8 extreme.

If Canon fail to deal with this issue, I personally will be keeping a closer eye on what Sony have to offer. Canon are no longer the only big player that make their own sensors.

James

[SteveEM]

Hi...all you unhappy 5D owners..

Why not take them back for a refund? under the UK consumer laws, if an item is 'not fit for its purpose' you can return it to the seller (NOT manufacturer) AND you do not have to do it within the first 12 months...retailers always quote this 12 month guarantee thing...but it is RUBBISH. You have a 'reasonable' time in UK law to return an item and the more an item costs, the law assumes it must last longer.

Currys fell foul of this about 2 years ago, a customer bought a fridge costing £500 and it failed after about 15 months, the local Currys quoted the 12 month guarantee and told the customer to go see the manufacturer, they instead saw their local trading standards office, who told them the law and they successfully took Currys to court.

Stop whining and take the darn things back...make Canon take notice...

[radim]

Steve, although I don't have one if think reason why we're 'unhappy' is mainly because it's outrageous to have such a QC problem with camera that tends to be advanced amateur/professional body.

[Gen_bunty]

Steve,

I did take mine back and got my money back. David is on his second and it looks like he will be returning that one too.

The point is, as has already been pointed out, that this kind of performance is simply not acceptable and Canon seem to be doing nothing about it, but I take your point that if enough of them are returned, then Canon will have to start doing something.

James

[Lounge Lizard]

If only life were as simple as that!

I want a camera of the 5D specification and if good models do exist, then I want one. What I don't want is to have to test a series of cameras to find one I like. At the moment, there is no alternative to the 5D if I want that Mp and full-frame at that sort of price.

[merton]

'From my point of view it's good to buy 30D and wait for 5D upgrade. Let's hope Canon will bring soon (I hope next year) valuable upgrade. But again you have to buy non EF-S lenses as EF-S lenses are not compatible with full frame bodies (and of course 1.6 crop with 30D)'

Radim or anyone

can you tell me which Canon lens are suitable for a full frame camera. And maybe someting about the difefrence between EF-S and non EF-S lens I am a little confused (again). Hope you dont mind these questions

peter

[radim]

Peter, good comparison of APS-C and full frame is here. It's for you to better understand differences.

The lens selection for digital full frame photography is point of this discussion. Canon released 5D as a fully-fledged full frame camera. But even the lens designed for it is not enough. In general (as David addressed in new post) you have to be happy with limitations or go for 1Ds.

Generally every single EF lens should be suitable for full frame camera. But as you can see it's myth. At least with 5D.

Radim

[alanS]

David - I have absolutely no idea. If you are having difficulty what chance do us lesser mortals have. Generally though I get the impression that manufacturers could certainly be making more of an effort to design lenses to suit the characteristics of the bodies they also produce.

I genuinely don't know enough about the subject to make any recommendation or to advise others. As a relative outsider looking in though it does seem to me, and as has been picked up on by a couple of others, that some manufacturers lenses are not well suited to the characteristics of some of the bodies that the same manufacturer produces. Presumably then either new lenses or bodies is the answer.

In my own polite way and with no slight intended, that's my point.

[eirikhj]

David,

You have probably seen this on dpreview, but I'm posting it anyway.

[Lounge Lizard]

Thanks Eirik.

That's me under my old name (I changed it three years ago when I got married) only, like eBay, I can't easily change my name without jumping through hoops of fire.

I made the post in the hope that the trigger-happy audience there would provide lots of samples from their 5Ds so I could see if there was some pattern to all this. Unfortunately, the thread was diverted off course by self-opinionated lens theorists determined not to tell me what I want to know but what they think I ought to know.

I suppose that's why I seldom post there these days. At least the people on the AP forums are much better behaved, constructive, and think before they post without trying to get one over on you.

[eirikhj]

Thanks Eirik.

That's me under my old name (I changed it three years ago when I got married) only, like eBay, I can't easily change my name without jumping through hoops of fire.

I made the post in the hope that the trigger-happy audience there would provide lots of samples from their 5Ds so I could see if there was some pattern to all this. Unfortunately, the thread was diverted off course by self-opinionated lens theorists determined not to tell me what I want to know but what they think I ought to know.

I suppose that's why I seldom post there these days. At least the people on the AP forums are much better behaved, constructive, and think before they post without trying to get one over on you.

Oh...hehe...I didn't know that of course, but yes DPR is not the place to post much anymore because most of them has become self righteous bstards...it doesn't apply to all of them though...some really nice people over there too, but they are a minority.

[Lounge Lizard]

DPR is not the place to post much anymore because most of them has become self righteous bstards...

Don't I know it! The arrogance of some of them is unbelievable. One tonight said Go take pictures and stop trying to find excuses why yours aren't all masterpieces. Words fail me.