5d or 5dMK2?

is the 5Dmk2 worth £700 over the 5Dmk2?

  • Total voters
    36
Danger_Mouse

Danger_Mouse

Messages
636
Name
wayne
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking at going full frame soon, I will be able to afford a 5D and 24-105 in feb (if i can keep saving) but im thinking that saving a little longer and getting a 5Dmk2 and 24-105 might be a better idea. it will be around £700 more from what i have seen.

Im going to start charging for shooting this year and slowly building up a business, I like shooting portraits and editorial fashion, but will be looking at doing some weddings too.


but i have the feeling that the MK2 will go down in price (there for i will be losing out if i get one) where as the MK1 will stay around the price it is now.

so what im basicly saying is.....

is the Mk2 worth £700 over a Mk1?

thank you
 
I currently have:
40D (will be second body)
Canon 17-85 is (looking to exchange this in the future)
Canon 50mm 1.8
sigma 70-200 2.8

some other stuff.
 
It sounds like you're coming from the direction of what else might you do with that £700?

I've got a 5D but never had a 5D II so I can't directly answer your question.
 
If it's any help I shoot weddings and I'm looking to upgrade to the MkII early next year.

Reason?

Low light performance. Weddings are often conducted in less than ideal lighting where flash is not allowed. I've been shooting weddings on the 5D and 1DsII for a year now and a couple of times I've had to go to primes at f2 and f1.8 to get adequate shutter speeds at ISO 1600. So that ability to go a few stops higher would be my major reason for upgrading.

The new Digic4 processor is quicker, the amount of detail in the files is amazing and you can shoot video with it too and I can see that becoming more popular for weddings.

It also has auto ISO but I don't like the way it works compared to the D700. It applies a reciprocal of the focal length you are shooting at so a 100mm would have a min shutter speed of 1/100 and it would apply the correct ISO for that. But if I want to shoot at 24mm? and if I go to 200mm? I would not want it to ramp the ISO up so high as to get 1/200 when 1/100 would suffice. Let me choose the darned shutter speed myself thanks! Oh and it does not work at all in manual.

It will cost me about £1000 to upgrade and I'm prepared to pay that. It's my job to keep up. :)
 
I do the majority of my work with a mk1 and I love it, but like ali, I'll probably look to upgrade soon but think it'll probably come down a bit first, unless we keep printing money, then it might not. £700 would by a lot of lens, I'd look at the 24-70 as opposed to the 24-105 but thats a whole other topic..
 
petebarnes said:
I do the majority of my work with a mk1 and I love it, but like ali, I'll probably look to upgrade soon but think it'll probably come down a bit first, unless we keep printing money, then it might not. £700 would by a lot of lens, I'd look at the 24-70 as opposed to the 24-105 but thats a whole other topic..
Click to expand...

i will start that topic, as thats another thing i was looking at :lol:
 
I love my Mk1 and it may still have to be prised from my cold cold hands..........

It's still a hugely capable camera and I still shoot as much with it as I do with the 1Ds. If I want to travel light I'll more than happily grab the 5D.

Couple with the 5D. I'll stick them in as thumbnails rather than clog up your thread with my piccies. :) Click for larger. The first one is with a Sigma 24-70mm and the second with the humble nifty. :)

[url=http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=71771][/URL]

[url=http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=70218][/URL]
 
I have used both & own a 50d & 1Ds MkII. The 5D MkI was a serious consideration as a back up for the 1Ds MKII & lighter for travelling. The 5D MkII is some serious kit & the extra pixels allows you to crop without too much loss. The low light & noise is a hudge improvemet over the MKI which in its day was an excellent camera. Both are quality but I think the extra is worth it.
 
I would say it's worth the extra if:-
You need the extra mega pixels,
You need greater high ISO handling.

If you shoot studio stuff at ISO 100 don't even go above 400-800 ISO and only print at 6x4 or web, the mk11 version would be a potential waste of extra spending.
 
I bought a s/h 5D1 off another TP member after having a 40D. I am so impressed with it but I can see a lot of the advantages of the mkii. So its on my list for next year. I still have the 40D but haven't used it since getting the 5D but its not been the weather for outdoor sports. So I may sell the MK1 to part fund the MKII, its just the balance thats causing me grief!
Merry christmas all!

Dunc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top