Eos 5d vs the 5d mark II

[private]

I REALLY want/need a FF camera. I am not blinded by megapixels (don't need to blow up picks more than 16x20 - maybe 12x24) and I really do not want or need the movie capability - mainly b/c I will need a bigger/better computer and more software.

Is the newer mark II really that much better. What am I missing?

[Doug Pardee]

The original 5D is still an impressive camera. Aside from the increased megapixels, the mark II has improved high-ISO capabilities, 14-bit Raw rather than 12-bit Raw (allowing Highlight Tone Priority), Auto-ISO, some water resistance, sensor dust control, slightly faster frame rate on continuous shooting, AF micro-adjustment per lens, bigger and better LCD, Live View, and HD movie recording. There are other improvements, but I can't think of any other big differences.

Here's DPReview's take on the differences:
Overview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/
Details 1: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/cano...rkii/page3.asp
Details 2:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Cano...rkII/page4.asp

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by private

Is the newer mark II really that much better. What am I missing?

Have both. Mk II is way better. AF is lousy. 21 MP sensor, LCD and metering are better (IMO).

Originally Posted by private

I REALLY want/need a FF camera. I am not blinded by megapixels (don't need to blow up picks more than 16x20 - maybe 12x24) and I really do not want or need the movie capability - mainly b/c I will need a bigger/better computer and more software.

- for more details.
- still use the same computer (quad) and software

[private]

AF is not good on the newer one? I photograph the kiddos so I really rely on that - I think that is my issue with the 50D, some of the pics are soft...

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by private

AF is not good on the newer one? I photograph the kiddos so I really rely on that - I think that is my issue with the 50D, some of the pics are soft...

5D Mk II and 5D AF are similar if not the same. Recommend to use the center focusing point.

It is good enough for wedding, studio, portraits and landscape. You need 7D or 1D Mk IV AF for fast actions. Otherwise, wait for the 5D Mk III (maybe an improved AF system).

That is why I use Nikon D3 for kiddos. 51 fp, 9 fps, 12 MP FF, dual CF.

Originally Posted by private

some of the pics are soft...

Not sure FF will improve that.You may try increase the DOF or practice focusing.

[private]

the 50D is known for its noise and the 24-70 2.8 is known for its ability to take a soft photos. I want to go FF frame b/c sometimes I am in a tight space and a crop camera does not always cut it...

Its not really the camera but the lens. But when the 24-70 focuses the way I want it to - its MONEY! When I use my other lenses, I have no issue what so ever with soft pics, even my old kit lens...Maybe I should just get the 17-55 2.8 IS (almost got that one) and then trade the 24-70 for the 70-200 2.8...

aack - Canon sure know what they are doing when it comes to lens choices. Wish they had a 17-105 2.8 IS/

[LoveDSLR]

Originally Posted by private

the 50D is known for its noise and the 24-70 2.8 is known for its ability to take a soft photos. I want to go FF frame b/c sometimes I am in a tight space and a crop camera does not always cut it...

Its not really the camera but the lens. But when the 24-70 focuses the way I want it to - its MONEY! When I use my other lenses, I have no issue what so ever with soft pics, even my old kit lens...Maybe I should just get the 17-55 2.8 IS (almost got that one) and then trade the 24-70 for the 70-200 2.8...

aack - Canon sure know what they are doing when it comes to lens choices. Wish they had a 17-105 2.8 IS/

I cannot give you a direct answer since I'm still using my 28-70 f/2.8 L (sharpness is OK with me). However, I cannot believe the 24-70 f/2.8 L is that soft.

Maybe you have a bad sample or mis-calibrated version. Have you compared yours with another one? The 5D Mk II has fine tuning that may fixes this problem. Otherwise, it has to be recalibrate by Canon.

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by private

the 24-70 2.8 is known for its ability to take a soft photos.

More like it's known to be tricky to calibrate. From Canon's Chuck Westfall (emphasis added):

I included the EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM on a list of EF zoom lenses that in my experience are parfocal. However, there is more to the story with this particular lens. It turns out that while the lens itself is reasonably if not perfectly parfocal, it is very difficult to calibrate for autofocus over the entire zoom range. There's no way to diagnose the issue properly without having the equipment examined by a Canon Factory Service Center technician, but you can do some troubleshooting on your own…

Following that is series of steps that you can take to diagnose the calibration of your particular lens.