Canon 5D or Canon 5D Mk II?

[Magpie70]

I want to get back into my landscape photography, after spending the last couple of years concentrating on wildlife.

I also want to get a full frame camera (i.e. a 5D). The thing is do I:

a) Get a second hand 5D (how much on ebay, by the way?);

or,

b) Save up another month or two and go for the 5D Mk II?

What are the advantages of the newer model?

Thanks for any advice.

[mark_farrell]

The 5DII has a much better screen, and live view - which although gimmicky, I've found really useful for framing and focussing, especially with strong NDs on, and when using manual lenses. I believe it's also better in terms of high ISO, and of course has many more MPX...

[mid_gen]

The ISO performance and cropping power of the 5D2 is fantastic...glad I stumped up for the 5D2. I'm sure I would have been very happy with the 5D mind. Comes down to your budget really.

I find Live View invaluable shooting portraits with narrow DoF, to nail the focus point.

[daveb99]

I have had both a 5D and 5D Mark II and would agree with the comments above.

The 5D2 screen is also much higher resolution which reallys helps you to check focus, 5D screen was useless for this. I reckon the high ISO 'noise' improvement is about a stop.

The 5D is a very capable camera though.

[swag72]

I was in a similar position a few months back, initially looking at the 5D then thinking about the 5DMKII. I knew that there were things on the MKII that I was now used to, such as a nice big screen, live view, sensor cleaning, to name just a few.

I knew that in my heart I would always have wanted the 5DMKII if I'd gone for the classic. So, for the sake of a couple of months saving, why not get the newer model? Is there a chance that if you get the classic you will always wish you'd got the MKII?

[daugirdas]

mk2 is 14bit vs 12bit mk1. This makes really huge difference for shadows even at ISO 100. I have clearly observed that difference between 30D and 40D. 1Ds mk2 falls behind 40D in that respect. Not having live view for landscapes is somewhat limiting as well. 12MP is plenty though.

[zymotik]

I had a 5D for 2 years. I bought 5D mkII about 3 months ago.... MK II is not a major jump up in terms of how amazing the orginal mk I was, but it fixes all the little gripes of the mk I. MUCH better screen (every photo you take looks amazing with the higher res, more colour accurate and bigger screen), movie mode (which I thought I wasn't going to use, check out http://www.youtube.com/iandashb for 720p low light videos from my MK II, it does 1080p but I've scaled them down for you tube) and even more resolution! 21MP. If you can save for 2 more months, it'll be worth it! Focus on Imaging show is on next week, see if there is a deal there!

Ian Brown (http://www.ianbrownphotography.co.uk)

[sheridant]

you'll smile more with the MKII, and not get frustrated at what could have been. I question whether the improvement is that significant qualitywise - but everything is a little easier and a bit more flexible - but it's probably going to cost at least twice as much as a mk1 - which is a lot for a little gain

all that said - I love mine (though regretting not going the d700 route a little)

[Blue Eagle]

I would have thought movie mode would be a big plus? If I had a few quid spare i'd consider swapping my 450d for a 500d just for this.

[Mondo74]

Having had the same battle with myself last year I decided that if I had gone down the 5D route (as an upgrade from my 20D) I knew I'd always want the mkII. If you can afford it by only waiting a couple of months then my humble opinion would be to wait. I can't see how you could possibly regret it.

[Jayst84]

I went for the mk I, was nowhere near to being worth the difference for me. I use mk IIs quite often when I need an extra body for a job (a couple of mates shoot with them, so easy to borrow).

Never really noticed a worthwhile difference, apart from waiting a hell of a lot longer for my Mac to crunch through them when I'm processing the files.

[jimlizard]

There is also a very useful feature on the MK II that no one mentioned, that is the AF micro-adjustment of independent lenses.
That really makes all the difference if you like fast primes and if you don't want to waste money and time sending them for calibration. :)

[dannyd21]

I would have thought movie mode would be a big plus? If I had a few quid spare i'd consider swapping my 450d for a 500d just for this.


I wouldn't bother upgrading your 450 for a 500D just for the video, you don't get the control like you do on the 5DmkII or the 7D and the fps isn't all that good.

Canon really need to update the firmware for the 500D's video. :bat::bang:

[sheridant]

what are you going to do then?

[MissV]

I was told "It depends on your budget. If you can only really afford 5D. Get the 5D. If your budget will get the 5D II, or can do soon, get the 5d II as it's worth it"

I got the 5d II from Mr Kerso! :D