Canon 5d classic (or mk ii) in 2020

[Jon Rosenthal]

Hi all

 

I am very happy shooting apsc on my Fuji X-pro 2. It works for me when travelling for work as a print journalist (not much travel happening for a while). But I'm tempted to mess around with full frame.

Being locked-down in London has left me with a bit more time on my hands than is good for my sanity (or bank balance). Out of boredom I've messed about on ebay and see that there are cheap 5d bodies going for not much more than £100 (and a prime 50mm 1.8 costs about £50)

So here's the question to people who shoot full frame Canon (or I guess Nikon) -- would an old body like that be a worthwhile way of learning full frame, or has tech moved on so much that I would just be frustrated by the sensor and AF and be better off spending quite a bit more for a 5d mkii (I could swing that, but couldn't justify the cost of going to mkiii).

Thanks all 

[KevinS]

Just sold my classic 5D. Wasn't using it, but hung on to it for years after getting 6D. The classic was a great camera and produces images that have a nice quality to them. But I often struggled with banding in the sky, which is likely related to the 12.8M pixel count. Never have that problem with the 6D. If you're good with software, maybe the banding won't present a problem, but it did for this luddite. Lens quality could be a factor, don't know.  

[Doc]

I have had 5D, 5D2 and 5D3. If you can stretch it, go for the 5D2 - much better than the 5D original, particularly in that the 5D2 has sensor cleaning whereas the 5D didn't, and often had problems with dust spots etc.

 

Kumar

[Harry Harrison]

I think the Mk.II would be a camera that you could easily use alongside your Fuji X-Pro2 (itself an excellent camera) whereas with the Mk. 1 I think you might find 12MP a little frustrating, and there is also the matter of sensor cleaning as Kumar says. Looking on MBP in the UK 'excellent' versions of each go for £279 & £499 respectively. I use the MK. II, very happy with it, though as with anything I imagine if I used the Mk. III or IV I might be less so. However I use it on manual, usually at low ISO, always back-button focus, so maybe not.

[Johnnie5]

I think the 5D MKII would be a good choice.  I still use mine despite having newer cameras, it still produces great photos if you don't need better auto focus capabilities.  It is good up to ISO 3200 for Alamy with correct processing.

 

 

[Niels Quist]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

I have had 5D, 5D2 and 5D3. If you can stretch it, go for the 5D2 - much better than the 5D original, particularly in that the 5D2 has sensor cleaning whereas the 5D didn't, and often had problems with dust spots etc.

 

Kumar

 

Agree. I had the 5D for a couple of years - the 5DII was a great improvement - especially the sensor cleaning was a clear improvement. Still using my 5DII. But need to focus carefully - and would like the low light and night shot possibilities modern sensors offer.

Edited March 27, 2020 by Niels Quist

[Jon Rosenthal]

Thanks all - this is great advice. 

[Andy G]

Have both 5d clasic and the MKii, the classic produces lovely smooth images but the MKii has more resolution detail.

The classic had a problem where the mirror fell off and had to be repaired, mine did this but Canon repaired it for free, they are not doing it for free anymore so if you go down the classic route make sure it's had the repair.

The MKii has live view it's a great help if doing macro, noise control is better, rear screen is much better it's just a much better camera it's old but still relevant where the clasic is old but nostalgic.

It's rare I pick up the classic so for that reason I would reccomend the MKii.

It is tempting to buy cheap but I always find if I buy cheap I end up buying twice, so it costs more in the long run.

Good luck with what ever you choose to buy.

[geogphotos]

Mk1 certainly had dust problems. 

[William Caram]

Agree with the 5D2  being a great choice....I had the classic 5D and it was  Ok being full frame nice !  wide lenses stayed wide, i had a 20D cropped sensor before that being my first digital camera..

 

The 5D2 with  more resolution and sensor cleaning and better shadow detail was great too....I have now been using a 5D3 and shadow detail is better again, plus better auto focussing, just a refinement of the 5D2......Like the others have said,you can't go wrong with a 5D2 nice big files and great colour too..

 

I will eventually buy a 5D4 for better dynamic range and a few more refinements...but i'm in no hurry because many are jumping on the mirrorless wagon and while Canon have made some superb new fast aperture and expensive  lenses for the RF / R cameras and of course the soon to be released R5 camera sounds great....I  will stay with the 5D line and the great EF lenses, there will be some  bargains in the 5D line as photographers upgrade to the new R5 and R6 cameras...

 

Now you can make super images with a 5D2 and if you can at some stage get yourself a 24 to 105 mm F4 L is lens....you will cover most of your stock shooting with that combo...Of course a standard 50mm lens will go nicely with it as well..

[wiskerke]

Why bother?

Try the side by side panel in the review of the xt2 on dpreview: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-pro2/7

set it to RAW and the second camera to the Canon 5d. You can download the full RAW files. Try 800 iso as well.

Maybe even select another older camera like the Nikon 810 or the Sony A7R2. The Sony will fit any lens you will pick up or diy yourself - with a cheap adapter from Ebay or even some gaffer tape.

 

The 5d is cheap for a reason.

 

wim

 

[Nick Hatton]

My 1st full frame camera was the 5d although I also have moved on to the m2 I do miss the colours that the 5d seemed to produce straight out of the camera.

[Stokie]

I too started out with the 5D being my first full frame camera.  It produced some great images with the trusty 24-105mm lens before I upgraded to a MkII, then a Mk III, which I dunked in a pond and was written off, so replaced by the Mk IV.

 

I've been very happy with all versions of the 5D.

 

John.

[spacecadet]

5 minutes ago, Stokie said:

dunked in a pond

You're supposed to restrict cleaning to the sensor, you know.

[Stokie]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

You're supposed to restrict cleaning to the sensor, you know.

 

Ah, I thought I was doing something wrong....

 

Didn't do the lens any good either - both a write off.

 

I had them insured through Photoguard who were very good and paid out straight away for a replacement 24 -105mm lens and I had to pay a bit towards an upgrade to the Canon 5D Mk IV.

 

John.

[William Caram]

On 08/04/2020 at 19:00, Stokie said:

I too started out with the 5D being my first full frame camera.  It produced some great images with the trusty 24-105mm lens before I upgraded to a MkII, then a Mk III, which I dunked in a pond and was written off, so replaced by the Mk IV.

 

I've been very happy with all versions of the 5D.

 

John.

 

 

Hi John, as you have used all of the Canon 5D cameras...what's your take on the 5D lV over the 5D3....I have used version 1 to 3 and the 3 still amazes me with the quality files it produces ...That body is more than enough for shooting stock...all things being equal....good technique and L quality lenses help also...I have always been one or two bodies below the current body version, and i know the image quality ( from what i've read ) from the 3 to the 4 is moderately improved...but it's more refined in other areas..

 

I will upgrade to the 5D4 at the end of the year, and i have invested recently more into the EF lens lineup especially the fast tele zooms 70 to 200 and a fast fixed aperture 300mm with TC's 1.4 and 2x....So i have to work this kit even harder to get a return from stock...but that's ok as i like using great gear and i get enjoyment out my photography hobby...

 

So what's your take on the 5D4 

[Steve F]

On 27/03/2020 at 12:30, Jon Rosenthal said:

Hi all

 

I am very happy shooting apsc on my Fuji X-pro 2. It works for me when travelling for work as a print journalist (not much travel happening for a while). But I'm tempted to mess around with full frame.

Being locked-down in London has left me with a bit more time on my hands than is good for my sanity (or bank balance). Out of boredom I've messed about on ebay and see that there are cheap 5d bodies going for not much more than £100 (and a prime 50mm 1.8 costs about £50)

So here's the question to people who shoot full frame Canon (or I guess Nikon) -- would an old body like that be a worthwhile way of learning full frame, or has tech moved on so much that I would just be frustrated by the sensor and AF and be better off spending quite a bit more for a 5d mkii (I could swing that, but couldn't justify the cost of going to mkiii).

Thanks all 

 

Hi Jon,

Just taking a step back. I'm not sure there's too much to learn with full frame if you are experienced shooting with an interchangeable lens APS-C (watch all the comments come in response to this!).  I mean, you get more menus and the waterproofing and lens and camera build quality is generally better etc. You don't get an in-built flash so you need to get a dedicated unit. Other than that, I think the main thing you'll learn is that full frame cameras are huge and heavy!

 

Also, the market is moving in the direction of mirrorless full frame. Started by Sony in particular, but now Nikon and Canon are well in on the act too. If you wanted to learn full frame, you'd probably be much better off learning on a mirrorless full frame system. The only problem is, I doubt you'll find any mirrorless full frame camera second hand for as cheap as you've quoted.

 

Sorry to maybe confuse things, but hopefully food for thought.

Steve

Edited April 19, 2020 by Steve F

[geogphotos]

I don't really understand all this 'learning about full-frame'.

 

Yes, I realise how that leaves me open to the obvious sarcastic comments. Bring them on if you want.

 

Surely, you just get on with using the camera that you own without any actual programme of learning. 

 

The Canon 5D Mk3 does have a chunky manual and I refer to it from time to time when something goes wrong or when I want to know something new.

 

I bought my 5D Mk1 in 2006, the Mk 3 in 2015. And won't be buying another one until that one breaks and can't be repaired. 

 

It's a bit like agonising over what computer system you need. Then you buy something and just get on with it. Anyway, that's how I am.

Edited April 19, 2020 by geogphotos

[Doc]

58 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

I bought my 5D Mk1 in 2006, the Mk 3 in 2015. And won't be buying another one until that one breaks and can't be repaired. 

I also bought the 5D1 in 2006 and the 5D3 in 205, but got the 5D2 in 2011. I wont be upgrading till the 5D3 gives problems, but I did also invest in the 7D2 to use with the 100-400 mainly for wildlife, which I have been very pleased with - the combination of 5D3/7D2 works well for me

 

Kumar

[Harry Harrison]

2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

I don't really understand all this 'learning about full-frame'.

The OP can speak for himself if he's still watching this thread, though in fact I think he got a fair amount of agreement in the answers that he was given so he may not need to. I suspect that 'learning full-frame' was just shorthand for the move from a mirrorless APS-C Fuji X-Pro2 to a full frame Canon DSLR, and they are very different in use. The X-Pro2 has the rather brilliant optical viewfinder option, very like a Leica rangefinder, combined with an easy switch to the electronic viewfinder. Both are very different shooting experiences to a Canon DSLR if he's never used one, and of course the switch from APS-C to full frame means that the depth of field and the angle of view of a given lens focal length will be different. 

[Stokie]

On 19/04/2020 at 00:04, William Caram said:

 

 

Hi John, as you have used all of the Canon 5D cameras...what's your take on the 5D lV over the 5D3....I have used version 1 to 3 and the 3 still amazes me with the quality files it produces ...That body is more than enough for shooting stock...all things being equal....good technique and L quality lenses help also...I have always been one or two bodies below the current body version, and i know the image quality ( from what i've read ) from the 3 to the 4 is moderately improved...but it's more refined in other areas..

 

I will upgrade to the 5D4 at the end of the year, and i have invested recently more into the EF lens lineup especially the fast tele zooms 70 to 200 and a fast fixed aperture 300mm with TC's 1.4 and 2x....So i have to work this kit even harder to get a return from stock...but that's ok as i like using great gear and i get enjoyment out my photography hobby...

 

So what's your take on the 5D4 

 

William, I was more than happy with the Mk 3 and wouldn't have upgraded to the Mk 4 until I dropped it in a lake!

 

Because the insurance was new for old they couldn't replace the Mk 3 so I had to pay a bit more to upgrade to a Mk 4.

 

I don't think the extra cost is worth it to be honest. The images are larger at 86.1mp against 63.3mp so there is more option for cropping without losing quality. I'm finding banding in the sky sometimes with the Mk 4, I don't know if it's the lens (which was replaced at the same time as the camera and is EF like the old one) or the camera itself; or maybe i've set it up differently. I apply a setting on import to Lightroom and if I remove that the image is OK.

 

I've been working on some old images from the Mk 3 and i'm pleasantly surprised at the quality of them.

 

All in all, I don't think the extra money involved in upgrading from the Mk 3 to the Mk 4 is worth it - maybe other people think differently?

 

John.

 

PS. all the images on the first page of my portfolio are taken with the Mk 3.

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Stokie

[John Gaffen]

I've always used Canons so I'm a bit biased, I've had a 5D MkII, for several years now and I regard it as a  very capable piece of kit. I bought  It  used but in almost new condition. Its  all the camera I could ever need really,  I would not upgrade it to the later marks until it reaches the end of its useful life. Its good in low light shooting too. The only time I don't use it is in wet weather, as its not weather proof. Although has got damp outside from time to time and not given me any problems.   I do use it with EF- L  lenses, and it always gives me great results. 

Edited April 20, 2020 by John Gaffen

[Stokie]

3 minutes ago, John Gaffen said:

I've always used Canons so I'm a bit biased, I've had a 5D MkII, for several years now and I regard it as a  very capable piece of kit. I bought  Its  used but in almost new condition. Its  all the camera I could ever need really,  I would not upgrade it to the later marks until it reaches the end of its useful life. Its good in low light shooting too. The only time I don't use it is in wet weather, as its not weather proof. Although has got damp outside from time to time and not given me any problems.   I do use it with EF- L  lenses, and it always gives me great results. 

 

I can vouch that they aren't good in water!!

 

John.

[William Caram]

16 hours ago, Stokie said:

 

William, I was more than happy with the Mk 3 and wouldn't have upgraded to the Mk 4 until I dropped it in a lake!

 

Because the insurance was new for old they couldn't replace the Mk 3 so I had to pay a bit more to upgrade to a Mk 4.

 

I don't think the extra cost is worth it to be honest. The images are larger at 86.1mp against 63.3mp so there is more option for cropping without losing quality. I'm finding banding in the sky sometimes with the Mk 4, I don't know if it's the lens (which was replaced at the same time as the camera and is EF like the old one) or the camera itself; or maybe i've set it up differently. I apply a setting on import to Lightroom and if I remove that the image is OK.

 

I've been working on some old images from the Mk 3 and i'm pleasantly surprised at the quality of them.

 

All in all, I don't think the extra money involved in upgrading from the Mk 3 to the Mk 4 is worth it - maybe other people think differently?

 

John.

 

PS. all the images on the first page of my portfolio are taken with the Mk 3.

 

 

Thanks John, appreciated your take on the 5D3 V 5D4....as much as i like the 5D3 i will add the 5D4 at the end of the year as i feel the upgrade will be worth it for me....and be careful when you're near water with your gear....but you're lucky to have been insured..great  when you need it.

 

Bill

[Jon Rosenthal]

Hi all

 

Apologies for the poor forum etiquette of asking a question and then failing to follow the conversation after the first few posts.

 

Fantastic advice here for if I decide to make the plunge into full frame - but for now I think I will keep what little cash I have in the bank and continue with APSC since the camera I already have far exceeds my skill (and talent).

 

Thanks again for the help.