Should I get a 5D (I)?

[woodworth]

I would welcome your advice.

I am contemplating getting a used Canon EOS 5D (mk I) as they are so cheap at the moment. This may lead to getting the Mk III at a later date, but I certainly won't get Mk III to start with as I'm just dipping my toe into the Canon system to see if it suits me better than my current setup.

I don't really want a discussion on whether my current system is better or worse than Canon or we'll be here forever and all the uber Canon devotees will only mock my current line-up in the way Ken Rockwell pours contempt on whatever is not his current "best camera ever"!

So, to the point; in terms of image quality, is the 5D (I) similar to the 5D(III) apart from the image size? I am aware that the 5D (III) has almost double the Mp. I am interested in using it primarily for hand held available light work. I would be happy with 12Mp and would more than likely shoot RAW. If I was to use a 5D (III) I would use the reduced size RAW option for this kind of work.

Any comments?

 

[RVB]

Hi,for handheld work the 5Dmk3 is far better at higher ISO's and has a much improved autofocus system.Overall I.Q is a lot better.

 

[woodworth]

Thanks RVB,

I can see that the Mk I would be inferior as it is a less highly specified and older model. However, is it so very much worse that I might be put off the Canon system when compared to a similar Sony or Nikon model?

Also, how do you find the 5D with prime lenses? Do you get sharp pictures when wide open (I'm interested in the 35/2, the 85/1.8 and the 135/2 in particular)?

I know this a lot to ask, but if you can add your penny's worth, it would be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

[RVB]

I am not using Canon at the moment,but the 35/2 is pretty good but has focus shift issue's,I would try to get the sigma 35 1.4 instead if possible ,the 85 1.8 is great by 2.8 but is fine wide open ,the 135/2 I never used but lens rental did a quick test which will give you an idea of the character of this lens LensRentals.com - Zeiss ZE 135mm f/2 vs. Canon 135mm f/2L

It is a lens a lot of people really love and a fair bit cheaper than the Zeiss 135/2 and obviously with A.F.

best

Rob

 

[Oren Grad]

I've owned a 5DII, currently have a 5D which I purchased second-hand recently - and I've read the 5DIII reviews like everybody else .

My take in a nutshell:

The 5DIII has the most pixels, the fastest and more accurate AF, and the most robust construction, and is generally the most responsive and reliable tool when things are changing quickly.

But the original 5D has the nicest color, especially at low ISO. One of the ways Canon has stretched dynamic range and pushed high ISO in the newer models has been by messing with the transmission properties of the color filter array, and I'm one of those who think the change has not been for the better.

FWIW, if you're coming from Nikon, in my experience the 5D and 5DII AF feels pretty sluggish compared with that of any Nikon model of recent years, even their low-end stuff. The finder blackout time is also relatively long with both models, which further exacerbates the general feeling of sluggishness.

Re the 35/2, I've been pretty disappointed with mine in digital capture, although it's a competent lens for film. It doesn't have the tonal subtlety of the 35/1.4L, and the rendering of OOF backgrounds, which bothers me a bit on film, can sometimes get really nasty in digital capture. Where size and weight aren't an issue I'm happier with the 35/1.4L, otherwise I prefer the 40/2.8 STM. Afraid I can't tell you anything about 85 or 135 as I don't own anything longer than a 50.

EDIT: One more thing comes to mind - my 5D seems to have more of a shutter/mirror/body resonance than my 5DII did, and I'm finding it a bit more difficult to get crisp results hand-held at lowish shutter speeds (say, around 1/30). I don't know whether that's just a sample variation with mine, or a characteristic of 5D's more generally.

 

[tbhv55]

Also, how do you find the 5D with prime lenses? Do you get sharp pictures when wide open (I'm interested in the 35/2, the 85/1.8 and the 135/2 in particular)?

I have the 5D Mk1 and I also have (among others) the 85mm f/1.8 lens. This camera/lens combination is a very nice set-up, and I'd agree with RVB's comments above i.e. it's very good at f/2.8 and smaller, and still just fine even when fully wide open.

The 5D Mk1 is great up to about ISO 800, reasonable up to about ISO 1600, after which it becomes a bit messy... especially if you're pixel-peeping. However, if you're intending to down-res your images, then high ISO can still be Ok.

Hope this helps.

 

[woodworth]

Thanks for the comments so far, some good points from tbhv55 and Oren Grad. Particularly glad to have Oren's comments.

I am in fact considering swapping from Nikon to Canon (as Oren seems to have guessed) but not sure if I want to make the leap or not. There are good things in both systems as well as bad. I may in fact end up with a dual system set-up.

One of the things prompting me to look into the Canon system is that I've not been overwhelmed with the Nikon prime lens set up, with perhaps the 135/2 Nikkor being the exception.

Lots to think about ... so any further comments much appreciated.

 

[mmbma]

Get the 1Ds

I bought the original 1Ds a few months back for $400. Crazy. the same system cost 8000 back in 2008. It still performs like a charm. Much better AF system than all the 5Ds ( I hear the Mk iii uses the same AF system from the 1d) and it is still full frame.

If you can live with 1) bad lcd, 2)11mp resolution, and 3) 8 frame shot buffer. Then it is a great system at dirt cheap prices

 

[tbhv55]

Get the 1Ds

I bought the original 1Ds a few months back for $400. Crazy. the same system cost 8000 back in 2008. It still performs like a charm. Much better AF system than all the 5Ds ( I hear the Mk iii uses the same AF system from the 1d) and it is still full frame.

If you can live with 1) bad lcd, 2)11mp resolution, and 3) 8 frame shot buffer. Then it is a great system at dirt cheap prices

Good point... this would certainly be a decent alternative. I wouldn't say that the lower (11mp) resolution matters too much (for most regular purposes), but the screen might be a different story. I used to have a 1DMk2 with (I think) the same sized screen. Great camera, but the screen was pretty abysmal... very small, and difficult to read, especially if - like mine - your near-vision isn't so good any more.

 

[tbhv55]

The 5DIII has the most pixels, the fastest and more accurate AF, and the most robust construction, and is generally the most responsive and reliable tool when things are changing quickly.

But the original 5D has the nicest color, especially at low ISO. One of the ways Canon has stretched dynamic range and pushed high ISO in the newer models has been by messing with the transmission properties of the color filter array, and I'm one of those who think the change has not been for the better.

@ woodworth: Although I've never used the 5DMk3, I have used a 5DMk2, and I'd agree with the above comments regarding the Mk2 vs. Mk1. The improvements in AF are evident, and the resolution figures speak for themselves.

However, I too prefer the colours from the Mk1. This is, of course, subjective... but I've seen plenty of similar comment around the web.

If you have never used any of the 5Ds, perhaps you should try to borrow the various models, or least try them out with your own CF card in, which you could then take home and compare the results. (I know... easier said than done. )

 

[woodworth]

mmbma, thanks for the suggestion of a 1Ds, however despite the good prices for this model, the bulk and the rear screen would rule it out for me. I have always preferred the size/weight of the non-pro models; this partially due to back problems and the weight of a camera bag all day.

Thanks to the various other comments by others, all much appreciated.

The colours mentioned are a plus point, pictures taken with 5D cameras seem quite warm and attractive.

Any comments on noise in shadow areas? With Sony cameras (A700, A900 etc) this seems to be a particular issue, whereas not so much with the Nikons of this world.

Thanks again!

 

[Paratom]

Hi,
I use a 5dIII (because I wanted the advanced AF).
The 85/1.8 and 135/2.0 are excellent lenses and very sharp.
The 35/2.0 I had once. I found it ok but not great. This time I just have 24-70/2.8 as a 35mm lens.
The 50/1.2 is excellent but expensive.
Once had a 5d and I dont find the 5dIII color worse (but never ran direct comparisons).
I think I would prefer a 5dII over a 5d if 5dIII is too expensive.

 

[Oren Grad]

Any comments on noise in shadow areas? With Sony cameras (A700, A900 etc) this seems to be a particular issue, whereas not so much with the Nikons of this world.

The 5DII has nasty pattern noise in the deep shadows. The 5D is noisy too but the noise is more random-looking and to my eye less obnoxious. Neither allows anything like the amount of shadow opening you can pull off with a late-model Nikon.

 

[woodworth]

The 5DII has nasty pattern noise in the deep shadows. The 5D is noisy too but the noise is more random-looking and to my eye less obnoxious. Neither allows anything like the amount of shadow opening you can pull off with a late-model Nikon.

Could be a problem ... any idea if this has been improved with the Mk III?

 

[woodworth]

Hi,
I use a 5dIII (because I wanted the advanced AF).
The 85/1.8 and 135/2.0 are excellent lenses and very sharp.
The 35/2.0 I had once. I found it ok but not great. This time I just have 24-70/2.8 as a 35mm lens.
The 50/1.2 is excellent but expensive.
Once had a 5d and I dont find the 5dIII color worse (but never ran direct comparisons).
I think I would prefer a 5dII over a 5d if 5dIII is too expensive.

Seems that the 35/2 maybe one to avoid, perhaps the 40/2.8 would be a better choice?

 

[Oren Grad]

Could be a problem ... any idea if this has been improved with the Mk III?

5DIII vs D800 Part II - Controlled tests

 

[woodworth]

Thanks for that info Oren.

That info has confirmed for me that I shouldn't move to Canon entirely. I will probably get a Canon body one day so that I can have access to some of the Canon lenses, but there are some things that I simply prefer about the Nikon system.

Thanks everyone for all the contributions, these along with various reviews have been a great help.

 

[Oren Grad]

That info has confirmed for me that I shouldn't move to Canon entirely. I will probably get a Canon body one day so that I can have access to some of the Canon lenses, but there are some things that I simply prefer about the Nikon system.

I have motley mix of equipment from different brands myself. My purchase of a 5D was opportunistic - I was curious about it, already had the most important lenses I'd need, and happened upon a chance to get one very cheap. But it's a nice addition to my toolkit, not a replacement for anything or any basis for a wholesale system change.

It's a pity that the "film" in digital cameras is built in to the camera. So often I'd like to match one brand's sensors with another brand's bodies and lenses.

Anyway, good luck whichever direction you go!

 

[lowep]

What Oren says fits very well with my own enjoyable fling with the 5D a few years ago. So too bad those who have tried both seem to reckon the later models don't deliver the same lucid files, since this would make the choice a no+brainer. That leaves the choice between images with that special 5D quality for a bargain price or a more expensive later model DSLR with useful features like better performance in low light, video, anti-dust etc that is not an easy one. Maybe that's why so many people who have a 5D also have a "real" DSLR just like those farmers who put a dog in with their sheep to keep away the bears.

 

[Paratom]

5DIII vs D800 Part II - Controlled tests

I dont think the 5diii sensor is much different than hte mkii.
However as a user of the 5diii I have not found any real problem with its dr.
I came from a D700 and changed because Imprefer Canon color, specially skin color. IMO color is often overseen inreviews.
Plus there are some Canon lenses I love (50-1.2,135-2,24-70ii).
However I would be a bit afraif of Af performance/reliabulity in case of the 5dmk1.