Topic: 5D to 5d MK2 (Read 7371 times)

soboyle · « **on:** December 18, 2008, 11:24:13 am »

Any new owners of the 5D MK2 care to comment on the improvements they are seeing over the older 5D?
Seems like a worthy upgrade for the resolution increase, but when I compare the curves between these 2 on Dxo mark, there isn't That much difference between them. I mean, is it that much better (resolution aside)?

dseelig · « **Reply #1 on:** December 18, 2008, 02:21:04 pm »

High iso is much better 3200 is totally usable. David

marcmccalmont · « **Reply #2 on:** December 18, 2008, 04:03:08 pm »

DR is better, you can recover more in the highlights and shadows are not as noisy
As far as DxoMark ranking goes 5D 70.9 and 5D2 79 that's a significant improvement
Marc

ndevlin · « **Reply #3 on:** December 19, 2008, 03:11:29 pm »

Resolution, speed of handling, high ISO performance...it's all better.

I disliked the 5D, and am growing very fond of the Mark II (somewhat to my surprise).

- N.

digitaldog · « **Reply #4 on:** January 12, 2009, 10:03:30 am »

Its a big step forward for me. The high ISO shots are amazing. I love the Auto ISO option. The quality of the images are impressive over the older camera. If only I could find some extra batteries, I'd be happier but I'm thinking this is the camera for me for a very long time to come.

soboyle · « **Reply #5 on:** January 12, 2009, 10:08:54 am »

I made the jump to the MK2, and so far it seems to be an impressive camera, feels snappier than the 5D, which was no slouch, the resolution upgrade is noticable when cropping and looking at fine detail. I'm happy with it. the low light capabilities are impressive.

ctribble · « **Reply #6 on:** January 14, 2009, 05:02:13 am »

Quote from: digitaldog

Its a big step forward for me. The high ISO shots are amazing. I love the Auto ISO option. The quality of the images are impressive over the older camera. If only I could find some extra batteries, I'd be happier but I'm thinking this is the camera for me for a very long time to come.

I agree on the Auto ISO feature - I've got used to using this on my M8s and missed it on the 5D. Great to have it back (though I've not found if there's a way of setting the upper ISO limit for this / fixing the threshold shutter speed - anyone know if this can be done?)

Chris

NigelC · « **Reply #7 on:** January 14, 2009, 06:26:39 am »

Quote from: soboyle

I made the jump to the MK2, and so far it seems to be an impressive camera, feels snappier than the 5D, which was no slouch, the resolution upgrade is noticable when cropping and looking at fine detail. I'm happy with it. the low light capabilities are impressive.

Have you found any limitations on existing lenses that lead you to quwestion whetehr increase in reloution worthwhile (althoufgh rgere are lots of other things that would make upgrade worthwhile)

For information, I have 17-40, 24-105, 50/2.5, 70-200/4 IS, 300/4, 1.4X and the only change I would consider would be a 16-35 II for the 17-40 (although mine is fine with 5D)

Ben Rubinstein · « **Reply #8 on:** January 14, 2009, 06:29:06 am »

Quote from: ctribble

I agree on the Auto ISO feature - I've got used to using this on my M8s and missed it on the 5D. Great to have it back (though I've not found if there's a way of setting the upper ISO limit for this / fixing the threshold shutter speed - anyone know if this can be done?)

Chris

It can't which is why I can't get excited by it, the Nikon system is far more intelligent. I think that anyone who thinks that they can consistently achieve 1/focal length with a 21 megapixel camera is living in a dream world or is far from the average.

rcdurston · « **Reply #9 on:** January 14, 2009, 08:13:53 am »

Quote from: pom

It can't which is why I can't get excited by it, the Nikon system is far more intelligent. I think that anyone who thinks that they can consistently achieve 1/focal length with a 21 megapixel camera is living in a dream world or is far from the average.

On shoot days I stay away from coffee and I'm usually in a postion where I can't place a camera support or don't have the time to. I'll fire off 5 frames, all the way down to one or two seconds where need be and often have 3 frames of the 5 to choose from. I have been noticing though, now with the Mk2 I'm cranking the iso to 1600 and 3200 and not worrying as much since I know it will hold it; that with the fact the resolution is double my old cameras makes it indispensible for me.

Adam Schallau · « **Reply #10 on:** January 15, 2009, 11:59:04 pm »

The high ISO shots are amazing. Other nice upgrades include the Auto ISO feature, the higher resolution of the screen, the weather sealing, 4fps, and 21MP is nice too. I even like the Battery Info screen.

Kirk Gittings · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2009, 12:07:18 am »

For my architecture business. I used it on my first assignment yesterday...........

The highlight warning on the main preview is invaluable.
Highlight compensation is good for blown out windows and MKII has better DR in general.
The brighter viewing screen is MUCH better in daylight.

more to come as I think about it.

Panopeeper · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2009, 12:21:09 am »

I don't understand this relaxed attitude towards using high ISO. High ISO is not an equivalent substitute for exposure; it should be used only if the exposure can not be increased sufficiently.

The DR of the 5D2 at ISO 1600 is already two stops lower than at ISO 100, and going to ISO 3200 decreases it by almost one stop. In other words, the real gain between 1600 and 3200 is tiny, between of 0.1-0.15 EV, the loss of DR is accordingly 0.85-0.9 EV.

rcdurston · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2009, 04:27:13 am »

Quote from: Panopeeper

I don't understand this relaxed attitude towards using high ISO. High ISO is not an equivalent substitute for exposure; it should be used only if the exposure can not be increased sufficiently.

The DR of the 5D2 at ISO 1600 is already two stops lower than at ISO 100, and going to ISO 3200 decreases it by almost one stop. In other words, the real gain between 1600 and 3200 is tiny, between of 0.1-0.15 EV, the loss of DR is accordingly 0.85-0.9 EV.

Numbers don't mean much to me anymore; I base my stuff on what works. When I'm at a location and given minutes to capture something and sometimes having to do it handheld, then the high ISO capabilities of the mk2 are indispensable.
The warehouse shot in my recent section of my site was shot at 1600 and the detail in the concrete wall is amazing. It doens't matter if the shadows block up a bit or the overhead lighting burns out. You get the feel for the place; dark, gritty, desaturated and oily.
Keeps pushing those numbers around Pano
Love my 5Dmk2
r

NigelC · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2009, 05:22:58 am »

Quote from: rcdurston

Numbers don't mean much to me anymore; I base my stuff on what works. When I'm at a location and given minutes to capture something and sometimes having to do it handheld, then the high ISO capabilities of the mk2 are indispensable.
The warehouse shot in my recent section of my site was shot at 1600 and the detail in the concrete wall is amazing. It doens't matter if the shadows block up a bit or the overhead lighting burns out. You get the feel for the place; dark, gritty, desaturated and oily.
Keeps pushing those numbers around Pano
Love my 5Dmk2
r

Had a look at your site - like your work

rcdurston · « **Reply #15 on:** January 16, 2009, 06:14:04 am »

Quote from: NigelC

Had a look at your site - like your work

Thanks Nigel
All that money investing in lighting and more and more I'm going back to just ambient. Hmmmm.

digitaldog · « **Reply #16 on:** January 16, 2009, 09:28:36 am »

Quote from: rcdurston

Numbers don't mean much to me anymore; I base my stuff on what works. When I'm at a location and given minutes to capture something and sometimes having to do it handheld, then the high ISO capabilities of the mk2 are indispensable.

I fully agree. High ISO is indispensable when the goal is to get a capture that, without high ISO would not result. I shoot all kinds of "by the hip" stuff at the highest ISO I could get out of the 5D (even with a 35mm 1.4) and I needed more. I got more in the 5DmII and the existing upper limits from the 5D are vastly superior with the new body.

It be great to get the ideal ETTR at 100 iso (I've done enough homework on that subject). We don't live in a perfectly lit world. Love the high ISO and the auto ISO of the new body.

digitaldog · « **Reply #17 on:** January 16, 2009, 09:29:33 am »

Quote from: Kirk Gittings

The highlight warning on the main preview is invaluable.

Alas, if only it was based on the Raw data, not the processed JPEG I never use....

Kirk Gittings · « **Reply #18 on:** January 16, 2009, 01:22:29 pm »

Quote from: digitaldog

Alas, if only it was based on the Raw data, not the processed JPEG I never use....

I realize that as I only shoot RAW, but I have found with some experience I can still get useful "ballpark" information from it and now that it is on the large preview I don't need a loupe to see it. It is kind of like when we used to have to filter for fluorescent lightimg using a color temp meter. The meter would give you a number and from experience one would figure out what that really meant with a particular light on a particular film. The meter was a crude tool for our purpose, but it was far far better than nothing.

archivue · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2009, 06:53:41 pm »

for my use the live view zoom is the main advantage... i can check focusing, and check the image at 100% in real time (i'm using tripod all the time).

Considering IQ, i thought the difference was bigger...

Author Topic: 5D to 5d MK2 (Read 7371 times)