A. Digital Camera - EOS 5D Mark II

[Benchista]

I think I've been using it long enough now to be able to pass some comments. The old 5D was possibly my favourite camera of all time (yes, even including the Rolleiflex), so how does the Mk II compare?

Size - well, it's much the same size and shape as the original, which fits my hands nicely, so no complaints there - it's much easier to carry than a 1D series, but sizable enough to work with any lens combo I ever use.

On resolution, I always thought 12MP was enough, and this wasn't ever a consideration in buying the Mk II. However, there really is a benefit from the extra pixels, and I'm staggered at what the new camera can resolve with the same glass. It allows fairly savage crops, and it immediately made me think of the difference between medium format and 35mm.

Noise - the 5D made me realise the benefits of high ISO working with low noise (for the time). The Mk II is streets ahead - the top setting - 25,600 - is pretty useless, but I happily use up to 6400 as normal - it gives the same sort of noise as the 5D at ISO 800, or the 10D at ISO 400. 12,800 is not as good, but usable in a pinch - somewhere between 1600 and 3200 on the 5D, IMHO. From what I've seen of the D700, there's not a lot in it between the two cameras in real world usage.

Speed - the shooting rate might not be blistering, but it's fast enough for me now, whereas the slightly slower rate of the 5D sometimes wasn't - and more importantly, I can shoot for longer.

Viewfinder - the Mk II is much brighter, a major improvement. At the expense of needing different screens, though.

LCD - possibly the most major improvement, daft as it sounds. I've not yet found conditions too bright to be able to use the screen in, and the resolution is now usable.

Live view - very useful on limited occastions - great on a tripod, even in bright light, but NBG handheld.

HD video - well, it's one reason I wanted the camera. Has to be seen to be believed, the quality ia astonishing, and the ability to shoot full HD video with a fisheye lens, for example, is something else.

AF - for some reason, it seems miles better than the 5D, I've no idea why.

Metering - ah, now here's the one weak point. I've always found Canon's Evaluative metering to be very good indeed, and it certainly was in the original 5D - however, the Mk II does tend to overexpose when shooting landscapes if you're not careful. The biggest issue I have with the camera.

Anti-dust - seems to work. The 5D was a real dust magnet, I've not yet had an issue with the Mk II.

Controls - although broadly similar to the 5D, some things have moved buttons, which was very confusing at first, and makes using it with the 5D or my IR-enabled 30D a bit complicated. Still, the ISO is now constantly displayed, which is better, and the separate AF button is great.

Customisation - as with the original, I use one of the C settings for mirror lock-up at the lowest ISO in aperture priority mode - a handy device. I'll have to work out what to use the other two for. The personal menu is handy, although I wish it had room for one more option.

Battery - it's a pain having a different, and very expensive battery, but battery life is fantastic, so it almost seems worthwhile.

All in all, it's a terrific camera that suits me very well - I do hope that Canon correct the exposure issue with a firmware update, though.

[Barney]

I think I've been using it long enough now to be able to pass some comments.

Shame you've just been using one though and haven't got one yourself.

(or have you fessed up to it yet? )

[Malcolm_Stewart]

Thanks for posting. A very helpful review for a 5D owner.

I'm still happy with my 5D, but your comments may hurt my savings sooner rather than later... At least I now see some softening in the price.

As you seem happy with the higher ISO noise performance, have you noticed any banding from the 5D II which seems to get mentioned by many users?

With regard to sensor dust, once I'd got the sensor clean on my s/h 1D MkIII, it seems to have stayed free of dust spots; and it's had quite heavy (amateur) use in the 15 months that I've had it.

[Benchista]

Banding in 25,600 is in just about every shot - at 12,800 it's present in quite a few, but the appearance seems to be lessened by using RAW and DPP instead of ACR or another converter, at least that's how it appears to me. That might be the case for 25,600, but the general loss of resolution and high chroma noise has put me off looking that hard. Not noticed any lower than that - not to say it's not there, of course.

[alanS]

My niece has just got one with the kit lens, 24-105mm or something? The range of the lens seems impressive. I'm waiting for her to give the camera some serious use and give me some feedback.

To be honest the lack of a built in flash is still holding me back, I know I'm very much in the minority over this but I do find it useful in fact I've never owned and never wanted an external flash.

One thing that did pleasantly surprise me is that the 5Dii is just a few mm bigger in each direction than my 20D. Looking at them in the shops they always looked much bigger somehow.

One thing which I wasn't keen on was the huge review screen on the back. I only use my tiny 20D screen for checking composition and the histogram so I don't really need a huge review screen that seems permanently covered in greasy smears. I can see how it'd be useful for others though.

[Benchista]

My niece has just got one with the kit lens, 24-105mm or something? The range of the lens seems impressive. I'm waiting for her to give the camera some serious use and give me some feedback.

It's the same lens as for the original 5D, and it's a great companion IMVHO.

To be honest the lack of a built in flash is still holding me back, I know I'm very much in the minority over this but I do find it useful in fact I've never owned and never wanted an external flash.

Flash? Who needs flash?

thing that did pleasantly surprise me is that the 5Dii is just a few mm bigger in each direction than my 20D. Looking at them in the shops they always looked much bigger somehow.

Yup, much the same size.

One thing which I wasn't keen on was the huge review screen on the back. I only use my tiny 20D screen for checking composition and the histogram so I don't really need a huge review screen that seems permanently covered in greasy smears. I can see how it'd be useful for others though.

The 20D screen, like the 10D one, wasn't much use for anything else really. I've been shooting mostly macro today, and the live view is really handy for it.

[blackrose]

Hello, have just upgraded from a 20D to the new 5D mkll and have been enjoying the benefits of what seems to be a fine camera. However one thing I have noticed in comparison to my 20D is that the 5D is approx 1 and 1/3 stops slower (darker) when shooting the same ISO100 and at f22 using the same lense. Is this because it has a larger sensor/wider ISO range etc etc? To me ISO100 is exactly that and I see no reason why it should differ from my other camera. Have I bought a faulty model or is it as i said due to the sensor?
Please help.
Best regards, Carlos.

[beejaybee]

However one thing I have noticed in comparison to my 20D is that the 5D is approx 1 and 1/3 stops slower (darker) when shooting the same ISO100 and at f22 using the same lense. Is this because it has a larger sensor/wider ISO range etc etc? To me ISO100 is exactly that and I see no reason why it should differ from my other camera.

Well it does depend on how the meter is calibrated, but 4/3 stops is a big discrepancy ...

Nothing to do with sensor size, ISO range etc. As you say the meter reading should be the same provided the ISO setting is the same.

Is the meter mode set the same? Try setting spot mode & metering from an even tone.

If there is a "fault" I'd suggest that the older camera is more likely the one needing adjustment.... does it tend to have bleached out highlights?

Can you find someone with an accurate exposure meter to compare against?

Oh, and a minor point - lenses lose the second "e" when referred to in the singular. One lens, many lenses.

[jchrisc]

I agree that more than a full stop is a big difference, but you don't describe the conditions for the test. How did you guarantee even and consistent illumination over the full field of view for both set-ups?

[blackrose]

Hiya thanx to beejaybee an jchrisc, much appreciated. I think I need to be a bit clearer in what I say. I'm referring to the exposure meter on the viewfinder where it has stops of up to +2 and minus -2. In addition the EOS 5D has incremental stops of 1/3 between each full stop (hence my query of 1 and 1/3) (I seem to remember this is how our photographers would order their film from the processing labs in the good old days). Sooooo, when my 20D is set to ISO 100 and the 5D also at ISO 100, how come the 20D exposure compensation reading is at zero, while my 5D is at -1 and 1/3 focusing on exactly the same object with the same lense in the same conditions?

Good point about comparing an identical camera. Will do!!
A-Y-N-D...lens, lenses?! I'm afraid thats why I ended up as an Art Director and not an English teacher. Will try harder in future.

Thanx again for the input guys.

[AGW]

They have different meters, different programming and the same lens will have different coverages? Disregarding the meter readings, how do the pics look, over under or OK?

Graeme

[Benchista]

Hiya thanx to beejaybee an jchrisc, much appreciated. I think I need to be a bit clearer in what I say. I'm referring to the exposure meter on the viewfinder where it has stops of up to +2 and minus -2. In addition the EOS 5D has incremental stops of 1/3 between each full stop (hence my query of 1 and 1/3) (I seem to remember this is how our photographers would order their film from the processing labs in the good old days). Sooooo, when my 20D is set to ISO 100 and the 5D also at ISO 100, how come the 20D exposure compensation reading is at zero, while my 5D is at -1 and 1/3 focusing on exactly the same object with the same lense in the same conditions?

Good point about comparing an identical camera. Will do!!
A-Y-N-D...lens, lenses?! I'm afraid thats why I ended up as an Art Director and not an English teacher. Will try harder in future.

Thanx again for the input guys.

Exposure compensation is something you set manually...

[blackrose]

Greetings. Thanx again for all the replies. Problem solved by the looks of things.
Firstly I goofed, it wasnt 1 and 1/3 stops, it was more like 1/3-2/3 stops. Still a difference but not as significant. Secondly thanx to DuncanDisorderly who pointed out that his buddies using the 40D had experienced the same problem, and it turns out that after the 20D series Canon had changed the metering system. Thirdly, on a recent visit to Calumet and testing their 5D, my camera was found to be exactly the same, which confirms what Duncan had stated.
Brilliant - I'm not going mad!!!


: )

[Malcolm_Stewart]

At the risk of re-opening an old thread, but this does seem to be the most logical place, I thought I ought to add the following:-

I bought my 5D Mark II at the 2011 Focus on Imaging, and it's been as good as other contributors have found; except, for me, in the video department. I normally shoot HDV on a Sony camcorder so it wasn't an urgent issue to sort out.

However playback of 5D Mark II video on my computer was extremely stuttering, and simply not worth watching. I thought it was probably due to my use of a slow CF card in the camera, but some recent research on the web found that my CF card was more than fast enough. Doing this web search came up with this page and so I installed the video viewer recommended, AND, I then followed the instructions to delve deep into the "Tools" tab, make the recommended change, and "Save". I can now watch my raw unprocessed 5D II video in full definition, and it's smooth.

I thought this was worth reporting as I was blaming my very poor 5D Mark II video on either a slow CF card, cluttered HDD needing defragging etc., whereas the captured video is OK and now plays well.

[0lybacker]

Hello, have just upgraded from a 20D to the new 5D mkll and have been enjoying the benefits of what seems to be a fine camera. However one thing I have noticed in comparison to my 20D is that the 5D is approx 1 and 1/3 stops slower (darker) when shooting the same ISO100 and at f22 using the same lense. Is this because it has a larger sensor/wider ISO range etc etc? To me ISO100 is exactly that and I see no reason why it should differ from my other camera. Have I bought a faulty model or is it as i said due to the sensor?
Please help.
Best regards, Carlos.

It MIGHT be a sensor difference - don't know enough about Canon kit and sensors to be definite about this but 'designers' fiddle about with the periphery of sensors, I understand, and may choose to use some sensor power for other tasks. It COULD ALSO be down to the video capability of the MkII. The camera set up/calibration at the factory would then take that into account, hence the difference between the two cameras.

On the other hand, there will be parameters for camera set up during the post-manufacturing calibration stage. Back in the days of film (alone) it was possible for a camera where the maker had specified, for example, plus or minus 1/6th stop to have all or most of the functions at the plus or minus end thereby resulting in two identical cameras leaving the factory with almost a one stop difference in their apparent exposure capability!

This may also apply to digital or the testing regimes and parameters may have become more rigourous with digital and increasingly electronic cameras.

[0lybacker]

... my camera was found to be exactly the same, which confirms what Duncan had stated.
Brilliant - I'm not going mad!!! : )

Oops! That'll teach me to read thru' carefully to the end of a thread ...