Canon 5DII review

[mcfoto]

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_can..._5d_mark_ii.php

[digitaldog]

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_can..._5d_mark_ii.php

Here's what made me very happy (and dying to get my unit):

There's virtually no visible noise at all from ISO 50 all the way up to ISO 3200, with even the three faster settings of 6400-25600 producing perfectly usable images. Canon seem to have matched the low-light performance of the Nikon D3 and D700 whilst substantially increasing the resolution.

I was really hoping it would shine at high ISO.

[button]

Here's what made me very happy (and dying to get my unit):


I was really hoping it would shine at high ISO.

You might like this (5DII in sRAW vs D700):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=30236550

Not sure how scientific this is, but interesting nonetheless.

John

[digitaldog]

You might like this (5DII in sRAW vs D700):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=30236550

Not sure how scientific this is, but interesting nonetheless.

John

Which is which? I don't see a label. I wonder too if both where processed the same way from Raw. As you say, might not be scientific, and knowing DP review, I have my doubts.

[DesW]

Morning from the Great Barrier Reef!

Been shooting with mine for the past week up here-- Hmmm-- yes improved Reso'-nice BIG clear screen--found the colour into DPP overly garish ,needs taming in process, I would also lower the technicolor LCD output from Default as well. Unfortunately my usual RAW programs( C1PRO and DC RAW) are not supported yet. Don't get me started on C1 V4.5-Phase dropped the ball on that one big time.
First impressions-no Vid time as yet-- great value at Canon Australia's  so called pegged price of AUD$3785 approx (2500 USD)this I gotta see!
I've ordered the Zeiss 21 f2.8 Distagon  EF mount for Jan delivery-- that should be a winner in the WA  stakes going on it's predecessor's reputation.
The  new 14mm II Canon still has soggy corners.

Good shooting,
Des W
Website

[button]

Which is which? I don't see a label. I wonder too if both where processed the same way from Raw. As you say, might not be scientific, and knowing DP review, I have my doubts.

Try this one:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=30227170

[digitaldog]

Try this one:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=30227170

They both look very good! Can't wait now for that pup to arrive. Thanks.

[button]

They both look very good! Can't wait now for that pup to arrive. Thanks.

Me, neither!  Not to gloat (too much   ), but mine will be in tomorrow.  For me, it's a really good all-around cam.  I'm really looking forward to being able to take no more that 6 (and preferably 4) shots for my stitched mosaics, and still exceed what I can get with my canon 40D (60-80 mpx images!- who needs MFDB?!).  I think I can cut the process down to 1 minute or less, key for rapidly changing light.  I also really want to see what it'll do with my 45 and 90 T/S lenses.  As for people/event shots, I can use sRAW and get superb low light performance, or shoot regular RAW if I want to embarrass someone by bringing out every skin flaw they might have   .  I'm sure I'll have a few niggles, but so what.  In the end, it's all about the shot, right?

John

[Ray]

There seems to be a lot of conflicting reports on the low noise capabilities of the 5D2. Some comparisons place it on a par with the 1Ds3. Others just a tad better.

Considering that 1Ds3 high ISO images are very close to those of the D700 & D3, when downsampled to 12MP, I would expect also that 5D2 high ISO images would be at least the equal of D700 images, when downsampled, considering that 5D2 noise will likely prove to be very marginally lower than 1Ds3 noise.

[bcroslin]

The bad news on video with the 5D MKII: there is NO MANUAL SETTING.
None. Zero. Zilch.

The camera goes into auto everything in video mode. If you're outdoors
in daylight you're not going to get any wider than f5.6. If you're
indoors you're not going to get any better than ISO 400 and the camera
trends towards ISO 1000 - 2000.

The only way to get some semblance of control over the aperture is to
trick the camera. You have to point it at something dark to get it to
choose a large aperture and then point it back at something brighter
and lock the exposure. The best I could do in shade outdoors was f5.6.
In bright light the camera jacks itself up to f16. You can also use
the +/- EV setting to choose a higher or lower ISO once the exposure
is locked.

This is a big disappointment but my guess is that Canon will roll out
more control and a richer feature set in whatever the new flagship
model is in a year or so.

[Panopeeper]

I've ordered the Zeiss 21 f2.8 Distagon  EF mount for Jan delivery

I was searching for that lense and went to the Zeiss site and found something interesting: the 21mm is shown on the "product" page as available for ZE mount (Canon), but not on the "Ordering" page.

I emailed Zeiss and received following response:

Please note, that our ZE lenses are not available yet, that is why you cannot order it.

We are planning to launch them in the next 2 years but we cannot say exactly which month.

Two of their lenses (the 50mm and the 85mm) should already be available for Canon. What is going on?

[DesW]

I was searching for that lense and went to the Zeiss site and found something interesting: the 21mm is shown on the "product" page as available for ZE mount (Canon), but not on the "Ordering" page.

I emailed Zeiss and received following response:

Please note, that our ZE lenses are not available yet, that is why you cannot order it.

We are planning to launch them in the next 2 years but we cannot say exactly which month.

Two of their lenses (the 50mm and the 85mm) should already be available for Canon. What is going on?

Hi there,

I have dealt with this gentleman for years and he has always delivered as he states

Des W


From HongKong Dec 5 2008

Hi Des,

Thanks for your reply,I had called Zeiss agent and was told
That the Zeiss Ikon 21mm/F:2.8 lens for Canon will be launched
Sometime in Jan.I will mail you when I have the price.
Cheers
James
 
 
Vandermerwe Ltd
James Ng,
Email:james.vandermerwe@gmail.com
or vandermerwe@hutchcity.com
Skype ID:  vandermerwehk

[Nick Rains]

I was really hoping it would shine at high ISO.

 I just shot some stills at a stadium concert. At 1600 the results are excellent, at 3200 they are still quite amazing. At 6400 there is plenty of noise but still usable. I'm impressed so far, only had it 2 days. I'll be posting some images in due course.

[sean mills]

I just shot an event at work, near darkness, ISO 5000 and 1.4 worked beautifully.
Wonderful camera, but it's not a 1.
[attachment=10144:IMG_0285_2.JPG]


[Edit, forgot to swtich it over to sRGB, colors looked like garbage ]

[RobertJ]

The bad news on video with the 5D MKII: there is NO MANUAL SETTING.
None. Zero. Zilch.

The camera goes into auto everything in video mode. If you're outdoors
in daylight you're not going to get any wider than f5.6. If you're
indoors you're not going to get any better than ISO 400 and the camera
trends towards ISO 1000 - 2000.

The only way to get some semblance of control over the aperture is to
trick the camera. You have to point it at something dark to get it to
choose a large aperture and then point it back at something brighter
and lock the exposure. The best I could do in shade outdoors was f5.6.
In bright light the camera jacks itself up to f16. You can also use
the +/- EV setting to choose a higher or lower ISO once the exposure
is locked.

This is a big disappointment but my guess is that Canon will roll out
more control and a richer feature set in whatever the new flagship
model is in a year or so.

If you use any manual focus lens that has an aperture ring with an adapter (Zeiss, Nikon, Leica, ZF, Olympus, Pentax, etc) you can point the camera around until you get the ISO and Shutterspeed that you want, then you can lock the exposure, and use the manual focus/manual aperture lens to adjust the aperture on-the-go to get the correct exposure.

For shallow DOF outdoors, you can lock the exposure at ISO 100/whatever shutterspeed, and use a neutral density filter on the manual lens.  That allows you to use the lens wide open, or whatever you want.

It takes work in different situations, but the 5D2 was designed for run and gun video for amateurs, with auto-everything.  For the price, can we really complain?

[jjj]

Considering that 1Ds3 high ISO images are very close to those of the D700 & D3, when downsampled to 12MP, I would expect also that 5D2 high ISO images would be at least the equal of D700 images, when downsampled, considering that 5D2 noise will likely prove to be very marginally lower than 1Ds3 noise.

Why would you reduce the quality to that of lower camera to compare? Up sampling the lower res cameras to match the higher res would make more sense. Or even better, shoot both at their best quality and compare as they are - which how they will probably be used in reality.

[jjj]

It takes work in different situations, but the 5D2 was designed for run and gun video for amateurs, with auto-everything.  For the price, can we really complain?

Yes, the 5D is used by a lot of pros, so a happy snapper's video ability is somewhat pointless.
Though I suspected the video control would be pathetic/non existent and so wasn't that excited about getting one.
Looks like the much hyped video feature is on a par with a very cheap video camera but with terrible [video] ergonomics. Albeit with a fantastic sensor that you won't be able to really benefit from, as there's no manual control. Unless you don't use the lenses that you probably have to go with camera. Which kind of defeats the purpose.
This is exactly why RED was formed, through the frustration of video cameras that were deliberately crippled to protect artificially overpriced 'pro' gear'. I did think it unlikely that Canon would release a stills camera that would outshine their more expensive video cameras.

Maybe the guys who provide firmware hacks for the Canon Ixus/Elph cameras to shhot RAW etc... can do a similar thing for the 5DII.


Though shooting wide open in normal daylight is not possible without using ND filters regardless of manual/auto control. 1/50th at 100ISO on a sunny winter's day [no snow], currently gives me a f-stop of 16. It'll be f22 in summer. Cinematography is not the same as photography, despite the obvious similarities -  there are some big differences. You cannot simply use a higher shutter speed as that affects the look of the image and only tends to be done for dramatic effect as the image tends to 'strobe' with faster shutter speeds.

[Ray]

Why would you reduce the quality to that of lower camera to compare? Up sampling the lower res cameras to match the higher res would make more sense. Or even better, shoot both at their best quality and compare as they are - which how they will probably be used in reality.

I don't see it as reducing quality. If any image has noticeable noise at a particular size and ISO, it tends to have less apparent noise at a smaller size. Reducing noise by downrezzing represents an increase in quality with respect to noise, but a decrease in quality with respect to resolution. One positive effect tends to cancel out the other negative effect, so the net effect is, no reduction in quality. Even a D3 image at ISO 6400 might need reducing in size to make the level of noise acceptable.

I always display or print images at a specific size. I haven't yet worked out how to display or print a sizeless image. If one uprezzes a high-ISO D3 image to a 1Ds3 or 5D2 size, then I believe it will also appear approximately no less noisy than a 1Ds3 image shot at the same real or actual ISO.

[digitaldog]

I don't see it as reducing quality. If any image has noticeable noise at a particular size and ISO, it tends to have less apparent noise at a smaller size.

Exactly. That's because when resampling down, depending on the algorithm, you're essentially taking four pixels and assigning one new pixel value. Noise is random, this resample reduces the noise.

[jjj]

Exactly. That's because when resampling down, depending on the algorithm, you're essentially taking four pixels and assigning one new pixel value. Noise is random, this resample reduces the noise.

I understand that aspect, but it also reduces the overall quality and so seems like a false comparison.
If I'm printing 60X40" from say my 21+MP camera, I'll hardly make my image smaller with less detail, just to reduce noise, to then compare it against a 60x40" print from a 12MP camera. Mainly as the less enlarging needed from the higher res file will make the noise proportionaly smaller compared to the lower res camera.


I still think it is an iffy/odd comparison, as Ray seems to be implying a 12mp Nikon is as good as and will enlarge as well as the 1DsIII. Which will also mean that the new D3x will either be waaaay better than the Canon [and poss actually worth the money] or will actually be no better than the 12mp camera as the extra MP make no difference.
Or is this the "make things the same, to compare the differences which are now no longer there, way of testing"  you see around the place?