Canon 5D MK I 'classic' - owners thread

Yes, I've got one of the generic Chinese ones that you can programme to go all sorts of stuff.
 
It was quite a few years ago, if you search eBay for the name of the official Canon one all sorts of generic ones will be shown.
 
Anyone tell me if the focus confirm light in the viewfinder should illuminate when you get the image in focus using MF?

Lent my 5D to a mate n he complained that this wasn't happening but I don't think it should.
 
brianwar said:
Anyone tell me if the focus confirm light in the viewfinder should illuminate when you get the image in focus using MF?

Lent my 5D to a mate n he complained that this wasn't happening but I don't think it should.
Click to expand...
It works only with lenses with the appropriate chip.
 
Ah ok, are they likely to be L lenses? Doesn't work with my 100mm Non L macro of the nifty fifty 1.8 mk2.
 
brianwar said:
Ah ok, are they likely to be L lenses? Doesn't work with my 100mm Non L macro of the nifty fifty 1.8 mk2.
Click to expand...
I just tested my nifty fifty mk2 and it works super in manual mode. Mind you, it's only a brief red high-lighting of the selected AF sensor square.
 
Cistron said:
I just tested my nifty fifty mk2 and it works super in manual mode. Mind you, it's only a brief red high-lighting of the selected AF sensor square.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, the AF point rather than the green asterisk along the bottom.

Just checked, mine does that too actually. Well, so long as I have the focus activation (back button) pressed as I focus.
 
Hi, I've posted this on the MKII thread, but would like opinions from you guys too. For reasons too long and boring to explain, I am moving over to camp Canon. I am being given a couple of lenses, a 50mm 1.8 and an older 17-40 (I think) Canon fit lens, can't remember the make. I have seen pics with them both and from what I've read the 50mm seems a nice little lens, the latter has some issues with darkening around the edges on a 5D.

I take photos mainly of children or families, often outside but sometimes not, often in natural light, so low light performance is important to me.

So, my question for you is which do I go for? Is it better to have the mkII and an L lens, or the MKI and a cheaper lens?
I can afford a 2nd hand 5D classic and a lovely new lens- I'd quite like the 24-70mm f/2.8 L or the 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS (is the IS worth it?),

OR a 5D MKII and get something like the 28-105 mm f/3.5-4.5 IS too.
 
Last edited:
Golden rule is that glass is more important than body! A camera like the mk2 will show up any flaws in a lens too.

The Canon 17-40 is a great landscape lens on full frame, but wouldn't really use it for portraits.
 
Just purchased myself a 5D this afternoon, now just wait for the delivery.

Are there any good manuals on the 5D I can read in the meantime? I work away on an Ad-Hoc basis and knowning my luck I will be called away before I take delivery.

David
 
dwb11 said:
Just purchased myself a 5D this afternoon, now just wait for the delivery.

Are there any good manuals on the 5D I can read in the meantime? I work away on an Ad-Hoc basis and knowning my luck I will be called away before I take delivery.

David
Click to expand...

not sure on manuals.. but you can add your name to the list for the DVD. I got a double disc DVD that we're sending to each other. It's basically a guy taking you through all the functions of the 5D and what the custom functions will do etc..

Not sure where we're up to with the DVD at the moment - there's a few on the list waiting still so we could do with an update.

Feel free to throw your hat in and i'll update the list (y)
 
Thanks.

Would it be possible to add my name to the list for the DVD.

Thanks
 
I've decided to take the plunge and go full frame, I'm going to look at a Canon 5D to supplement my 600D. I saw some shots a friend took with a 5D and it blew me away, it was like looking at a quality 35mm film shot. Anyway the camera I'm looking at is described as excellent condition, lightly used by a local pro photographer, mostly for weddings, he reckons 10-15k actuation's, with canon battery grip for £600.
What should I look for , apart from the obvious ? Dust on sensor ?
I've just recently gotten back into photography and have found the Canon 600D a really nice camera but the images just don't have that "wow" factor. I've a selection of EF-S lenses, but only one EF the Canon 50mm F1.4. I'm thinking that lens will be enough at first to get used to the 5D, back to my old Canon A1 days. But I'd like to add a wide zoom, possibly EF 17-40 F4. Are there any decent alternatives, Sigma or Tamron ?
Any advice would be much appreciated.
 
I wouldn't expect too much improvement in IQ. I went from a 20D (which I've kept) to a 5D and I have to say that the actual IQ difference in full image shots at low to mid ISO's is minimal to non existent. At the highest ISO's I expected great things but again I found that the difference to my 20D is minimal. The 5D is better, maybe a stop or so and 5D shots do clean up better but really I think that it's pretty marginal. After going from 20D to 5D I personally would say that it probably isn't really worth it for IQ improvement, unless you are looking for a marginal improvement at the highest ISO's and you tend to do heavy crops and pixel peep.

This is just IMHO and others may disagree about the IQ but buy a 5D and expect to be blown away and you may (if you're anything like me) be underwhealmed.

To me the biggest advantage of full frame is going back to how things used to be and having lenses react the way they used to back in the days of film. You will probably see more vignetting that you saw with film but it's easily corrected in post capture processing. One of the biggest differences I saw going to a 5D is the DoF, not because of some inherent property that makes smaller sensors give more DoF as I don't believe that they do, however, because of the different (wider) field of view you have with a 5D over APS-C to fill the frame you need to reduce the camera to subject distance and that'll reduce the DoF. This means that you'll either be taking a lot of shots with shallow DoF or you'll be using longer lenses and/or smaller apertures than you would with APS-C and possibly shooting with slower shutter speeds or higher ISO's. It's swings and roundabouts I suppose and as I'd got used to APS-C as I'd been been shooting with it for years I had to readjust to full frame.

Anyway, 50mm f1.4's... take a look at the Siggy 50mm f1.4. I haven't read a review yet in which the Canon f1.4 beats it.
 
woof woof said:
I wouldn't expect too much improvement in IQ. I went from a 20D (which I've kept) to a 5D and I have to say that the actual IQ difference in full image shots at low to mid ISO's is minimal to non existent. At the highest ISO's I expected great things but again I found that the difference to my 20D is minimal. The 5D is better, maybe a stop or so and 5D shots do clean up better but really I think that it's pretty marginal. After going from 20D to 5D I personally would say that it probably isn't really worth it for IQ improvement, unless you are looking for a marginal improvement at the highest ISO's and you tend to do heavy crops and pixel peep.

This is just IMHO and others may disagree about the IQ but buy a 5D and expect to be blown away and you may (if you're anything like me) be underwhealmed.

To me the biggest advantage of full frame is going back to how things used to be and having lenses react the way they used to back in the days of film. You will probably see more vignetting that you saw with film but it's easily corrected in post capture processing. One of the biggest differences I saw going to a 5D is the DoF, not because of some inherent property that makes smaller sensors give more DoF as I don't believe that they do, however, because of the different (wider) field of view you have with a 5D over APS-C to fill the frame you need to reduce the camera to subject distance and that'll reduce the DoF. This means that you'll either be taking a lot of shots with shallow DoF or you'll be using longer lenses and/or smaller apertures than you would with APS-C and possibly shooting with slower shutter speeds or higher ISO's. It's swings and roundabouts I suppose and as I'd got used to APS-C as I'd been been shooting with it for years I had to readjust to full frame.

Anyway, 50mm f1.4's... take a look at the Siggy 50mm f1.4. I haven't read a review yet in which the Canon f1.4 beats it.
Click to expand...

Holy crap, finally someone agrees with me about sensors and DOF!
 
:LOL:
It's a (very) contentious issue but these days many people have interchangeable lens cameras with different sized sensors and if you are lucky enough to be in that position and can fit the same lens or very similar lenses to each camera all it will take to prove any point to yourself, whatever your point of view, suspicion or belief is, is 10 minutes testing.

Mind you, there are some that'll tell you that small sensors give you more DoF and that it's all down to the circle of confusion and/or the print size. That's one possible view. I'm lucky enough to have micro four thirds, APS-C and full frame cameras and have managed to convince myself that I know some of the strengths and weaknesses of each.
 
Last edited:
Just had the argument over on another forum.
They quoted the CoC thing but I wasn't buying it.

The way it went on the other forum we ended up arguing about what actually creates the DOF, I say the lens does as it's the lens that focuses the light so it creates then DOF, the sensor just records the DOF that the lens has created, what's your view on that?
 
Oh dear... :D IMVHO... DoF is a property of light passing through a lens, and that includes the design and how you set the lens and how light passes through it. The CofC is relevant in that it's related to what looks sharp or fuzzy to the human eye. However, I don't believe that the CofC is that relevant or that different from camera to camera to make a real difference unless you take things to ridiculous extremes end even then that isn't altering the DoF as such as there'll still be things in the image which are sharper or fuzzier in relation to other things. I'm not getting into splitting hairs about DoF and focus, as far as I'm concerned something is in focus (or is as much as can be) and to the front and rear there's a change and I'll call that DoF. Print size and viewing distance are other things that are often quoted as affecting DoF and whilst it's true that smaller images may look as if they have more DoF than larger images there will still be things within the image that look either sharper or fuzzier in relation, if you look closely. Altering the viewing distance alters our perception and may make the DoF look shallower or deeper but can't alter the actual image or actually change anything. It is what it is.

My own personal opinion is that the DoF and everything else is inherently set when you set up your camera and press the shutter button and all you can do after that by fiddling with print sizes and viewing distances or obsessing about the CofC is make the DoF more or less obvious. No matter what you do you'll always have the thing you focused on relatively sharper in relation to things both in the foreground and the background and those relationships will remain regardless of the print size or viewing distance unless you take things to ridiculous extremes.

Take three cameras, micro four thirds, APS-C and full frame and use the same lens at the same aperture and take three pictures at point "A" of an object at distance "B" and the DoF will be the same. The field of view will be different and doubtless some will obsess over the CofC and magnification factors but the DoF will be for all practical and realistic real world purposes identical. The differences arise when you try to equalise the field of view by altering the camera to subject distance, the DoF will then look different. You could equalise the field of view by changing the lens, for example by using 25mm on micro four thirds, 30mm on APS-C and 50mm on full frame, but as these lenses produce different images although the field of view is equalised they'll be different pictures and the DoF may look different as the longer the lens the more it'll "bring forward" background items and the shot will look different and so will the DoF.

Leave everything the same and only change the sensor and the DoF will be the same. All IMVHO, of course and please keep in mind that I was (now retired) an electronics engineer (obsessing about computers, IC's and diodes and other goodies) and not an optical one. :D

This'll cause so much strife that at this point I might as well say... "I was only joking." :LOL:

I like flower shots...

IMG_7909-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
jimgallaher said:
I've decided to take the plunge and go full frame, I'm going to look at a Canon 5D to supplement my 600D. I saw some shots a friend took with a 5D and it blew me away, it was like looking at a quality 35mm film shot. Anyway the camera I'm looking at is described as excellent condition, lightly used by a local pro photographer, mostly for weddings, he reckons 10-15k actuation's, with canon battery grip for £600.
What should I look for , apart from the obvious ? Dust on sensor ?
I've just recently gotten back into photography and have found the Canon 600D a really nice camera but the images just don't have that "wow" factor. I've a selection of EF-S lenses, but only one EF the Canon 50mm F1.4. I'm thinking that lens will be enough at first to get used to the 5D, back to my old Canon A1 days. But I'd like to add a wide zoom, possibly EF 17-40 F4. Are there any decent alternatives, Sigma or Tamron ?
Any advice would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Good move! If the 5D is a good one, that seems a fair price. I wouldn't be worried about dust on the sensor with the 5D, it will happen at some point. In any case I prefer to send secondhand bodies to be serviced in the first few months I have them, so that I have a known starting point with them.

The Canon 50mm f1.4 and the 5D is a good combination, my default combination. The 17-40f4 fits well under this too.
 
Ref. dust... get a rocket blower and that'll sort quite a few issues out.
 
updated list here for the DVD....

AKR
TAZ
BREN-ESCAPE
EIGHTH AVENUE
MUMRAR
MACVISUAL
CMJT_UK
JOHNN
DUNCAN_P
DWB11

has Taz received the DVD yet from AKR?
 
woof woof said:
Oh dear... :D IMVHO... DoF is a property of light passing through a lens, and that includes the design and how you set the lens and how light passes through it. The CofC is relevant in that it's related to what looks sharp or fuzzy to the human eye. However, I don't believe that the CofC is that relevant or that different from camera to camera to make a real difference unless you take things to ridiculous extremes end even then that isn't altering the DoF as such as there'll still be things in the image which are sharper or fuzzier in relation to other things. I'm not getting into splitting hairs about DoF and focus, as far as I'm concerned something is in focus (or is as much as can be) and to the front and rear there's a change and I'll call that DoF. Print size and viewing distance are other things that are often quoted as affecting DoF and whilst it's true that smaller images may look as if they have more DoF than larger images there will still be things within the image that look either sharper or fuzzier in relation, if you look closely. Altering the viewing distance alters our perception and may make the DoF look shallower or deeper but can't alter the actual image or actually change anything. It is what it is.

My own personal opinion is that the DoF and everything else is inherently set when you set up your camera and press the shutter button and all you can do after that by fiddling with print sizes and viewing distances or obsessing about the CofC is make the DoF more or less obvious. No matter what you do you'll always have the thing you focused on relatively sharper in relation to things both in the foreground and the background and those relationships will remain regardless of the print size or viewing distance unless you take things to ridiculous extremes.

Take three cameras, micro four thirds, APS-C and full frame and use the same lens at the same aperture and take three pictures at point "A" of an object at distance "B" and the DoF will be the same. The field of view will be different and doubtless some will obsess over the CofC and magnification factors but the DoF will be for all practical and realistic real world purposes identical. The differences arise when you try to equalise the field of view by altering the camera to subject distance, the DoF will then look different. You could equalise the field of view by changing the lens, for example by using 25mm on micro four thirds, 30mm on APS-C and 50mm on full frame, but as these lenses produce different images although the field of view is equalised they'll be different pictures and the DoF may look different as the longer the lens the more it'll "bring forward" background items and the shot will look different and so will the DoF.

Leave everything the same and only change the sensor and the DoF will be the same. All IMVHO, of course and please keep in mind that I was (now retired) an electronics engineer (obsessing about computers, IC's and diodes and other goodies) and not an optical one. :D

This'll cause so much strife that at this point I might as well say... "I was only joking." :LOL:

I like flower shots...

IMG_7909-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Great minds think alike!

I was trying to tell them on the other forum that DOF is the distance between the nearest and farthest points rendered acceptably sharp so that it didn't mater if the sharp part of the image covered 1% of the area or 100% of it. DOF in my eyes is to do with what's in focus but so many seem to think that it's to do with what's out of focus.
 
Finally got myself a 5D it's in excellent condition but there's a fair bit of dust in the mirror box, which I managed to clean. There's also a few significant dirt particles on the sensor, which I'm reluctant to tackle. I've a giottos rocket blower coming from Amazon, if this won't shift them I'm thinking of getting my local Calumet to clean it, they seem to be the only ones here (N.Ireland) who do a cleaning service. Has anyone any experience of the Calumet service.
So far I'm well impressed with the IQ from the 5D hard to put into words the difference compared to my 600D it's more organic ? Analogue , like old 35mm film ? Bottom line the images look great. Autofocus is a bit hit and miss and the shutter has a strange clunky sound, looking forward to getting out taking some shots on my days off.
 
yes... i can vouch for calumet. had mine in there 3 times.. think it was about £30 for a full clean up.. but i did get a £10 voucher off them in a mailshot, so i used it against the cleaning bill (y)
 
sorry.. i meant to add to that... give the rocket blower a try and see how you get on first. Quite often i see bits of gunk through the viewfinder but they don't appear on the images, so i don't fuss about it (y)
 
No the gunk is definitely on the sensor. Took a couple of landscape shots at f16 and there were around a dozen specks, a couple really black ones. I rang Calumet and the quoted £56, a bit steep I thought but I'll get it cleaned and hopefully the Rocket blower I've ordered will keep the worst of the dust at bay.
I'd attach sample shot but I can't figure out how to do so :shake:
 
joxang said:
Thought I'd post this here...

I miss being able to shoot ultra-wide and I want to make the move up to full frame, but portability is important to me (as is cost). I was wondering how the 5D Mk1 stacks up nowadays against newer APS-C cameras like the D90/D7000 series?
Click to expand...
The only drawback I can find with the 5D is the menus are quite primitive compared those on my 600D and the Nikon D5000 I own. The image quality is amazing , so much so I'm now tempted to sell it and buy a 5D mk2, just so I can get a more up to date menu system. Although I think I should get the hang of it first and maybe when the mk3 comes out the price of the mk2 might fall
 
jimgallaher said:
The only drawback I can find with the 5D is the menus are quite primitive....
Click to expand...

The only thing I use the menu for is to format the card or to clean the sensor. At the moment I honestly can't think of another reason I'd use it. Same with my 20D.
 
woof woof said:
The only thing I use the menu for is to format the card or to clean the sensor. At the moment I honestly can't think of another reason I'd use it. Same with my 20D.
Click to expand...

Yeah, me to. Oh wait, I fitted an EES screen so had t go in the menu to change that.
 
I agree, once everything is set up you don't really need to go into the menus.
 
Can i also be added to the DVD list please.

just got my 5D classic last week and love it! upgraded from a 40D, it was the right move from what i've seen so far!

Alan
 
Update list for the DVD....

TAZ
BREN-ESCAPE
EIGHTH AVENUE
MUMRAR
MACVISUAL
CMJT_UK
JOHNN
DUNCAN_P
DWB11
STEGSIE
ALAN_T

Stegsie said:
Can I please be added to the DVD list.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Done (y)

Alan_T said:
Can i also be added to the DVD list please.

just got my 5D classic last week and love it! upgraded from a 40D, it was the right move from what i've seen so far!

Alan
Click to expand...

Done (y)

Can we pick up the pace a bit with the DVD guys... some of the people on the list may have worn out their camera by the time they get it :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top