What's after the 5d?

[dude_man_dude]

Will Canon release a 6d possibly in the spring? I don't want to buy the 5d now since there's really not a great deal of difference between it and a 40d. I'm guessing they have to release a 6d soon.

[aLFaDaRK]

People expected either a 5D Mark II, or a 7D, or a 3D to be released at PMA. Now people are speculating that it won't be released until Photokina in September.

[Perry Ge]

Will Canon release a 6d possibly in the spring? I don't want to buy the 5d now since there's really not a great deal of difference between it and a 40d. I'm guessing they have to release a 6d soon.

They are massively different cameras. No replacement for now, and even if a new 5D comes, expect it to be a lot pricier than 5Ds are now, 3-4k.

[Tsmith]

There's even speculation that there will be no successor to the 5D in the near future.

[Perry Ge]

There's even speculation that there will be no successor to the 5D in the near future.

Which I think is the case.

[AdamLewis]

I don't want to buy the 5d now since there's really not a great deal of difference between it and a 40d.

Is this a serious post?

[JohnJ80]

Is this a serious post?

lol.

j

[dude_man_dude]

Is this a serious post?

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

[Mark_Cohran]

I take it you own a 5d....

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

I have a 40D and a 5D and they're two different tools. It's not as small of a gap as you try to make it seem. But, hey, if you want to wait, that's your business.

[Perry Ge]

all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

Is THIS a serious post?! :rolleyes:

[daveshel]

Is this a serious post?

I'm very serious....

I'm a noob here too, but I decided to read the forums for a while before posting. There has been much discussion on this topic here and in the Rumors forum, which is why people are reacting to your question with incredulity.

[JohnJ80]

Is THIS a serious post?! :rolleyes:

Amen. There isn't a day I shoot with my 5D where I'm not blown away.

Recently, I shot some landscapes in the Caribbean where there was some of that gorgeous turquoise water. At the shore, the bottom dropped off at about a 45 degree angle with some big boulders in the water. The images from the 5D had an almost 3D look to them - a look I get often with the 5D but have not ever gotten with any other camera except for film medium format....

The 5D is a very special camera - and full frame is a huge part of that.

That said, it is *ok* for sports but not great. That's why I'm looking for a more sports oriented body that will support fast moving outdoor sports with much snappier AF in AI Servo (1st priority) and a faster burst rate (2nd priority) so I can shoot a fast 3-6 shot burst in instances like where a skier goes around a gate or a soccer player heads the ball.

At 6.5fps, a skier at 30mph will go about 6.75' or just over a ski length (GS or so, for SL that will be about or under a ski length). A burst through a turn will give just about all the body positions I would want to see and the coaches want to see for diagnosis of body position and technique. The 5D is over 2X as far and not useful although its 6 hidden sensors have worked very well for AF on a single shot and tracking a moving subject with my 300mm f/4 IS.

When shooting skiing, my normal mode is to shoot at the skier hits each gate. I'd like to be able to shoot a minimum of 3 shots at each gate starting slightly before the gate and then pick the best one.

I have similar problems when shooting soccer.

In this application, is the 40D AF better than the 5D's? If so, and I know it is qualitative, but by how much (estimate)?

J.

[michaelj]

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

Buy yourself a 40D, and be happy. Enjoy life.

I'm obviously not serious as I'm considering upgrading to the 5D from a 10D but keep heading towards the 1DmkIII instead - that's a further 2 mpixels less for twice the amount again.

Too much time worrying about how you can have the latest and greatest is the quickest way to a depressed life - I should know.

Cameras are all about taking pictures and being happy. Not worrying if there's 2% more noise in your shadow areas than some other camera which may or may not cost more money, that you read about, and that everyone else thinks is even better.

What's after the 5D ? Life. It keeps going on regardless of new technology.

;)

[dude_man_dude]

Is THIS a serious post?!

well, instead of saying "is this serious", why not give some specifics? I'm sure you are a "professional"....so, why not share a bit of your vast knowledge? I'm just saying, on paper, it doesn't look like there's a huge deal of difference between the 40d and 5d, therefore Canon will either replace the 5d or drop it from their line all together. It's three years old now, so one or the other is inevetible, wouldn't you agree? The question I posed is will this happen sooner rather than later? Why even chime in if you can't back up your opinions? I'm not here to help you build your egos.

Regards

[stathunter]

The 40D is a great camera----the 5D seems to offer a little bit more of refinement to the pics----- is it worth the extra $$ --not for most people.

[dude_man_dude]

There isn't a day I shoot with my 5D where I'm not blown away.

Recently, I shot some landscapes in the Caribbean where there was some of that gorgeous turquoise water. At the shore, the bottom dropped off at about a 45 degree angle with some big boulders in the water. The images from the 5D had an almost 3D look to them - a look I get often with the 5D but have not ever gotten with any other camera except for film medium format....

The 5D is a very special camera - and full frame is a huge part of that.



Thanks John, this is the type of response I was looking for.

If I've rubbed the cat in the wrong direction here at the forums, I apologize....and I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone with a 5d. Obviously I'm new here, so my apologies. I'm on the verge of buying a 5d, but I'm thinking would I be better investing that money in more glass now and waiting for the 5d's replacement (if the replacement isn't too far away).

[stathunter]

Thanks John, this is the type of response I was looking for.

If I've rubbed the cat in the wrong direction here at the forums, I apologize....and I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone with a 5d. Obviously I'm new here, so my apologies. I'm on the verge of buying a 5d, but I'm thinking would I be better investing that money in more glass now and waiting for the 5d's replacement (if the replacement isn't too far away).

I think your thinking of investing in glass is a good idea. Good luck! :)

[steve 2701]

Have you even bothered to try and do a forum search here or maybe even a google on 5D reviews?
I did, & realised fully that it was what I needed in a camera - but it obviously ain't going to be for you, as you are already putting it down. Sure there may be another along sometime sooner or later - but at what price to what it is now?
Each to their own, take your time, read what is on here and everywhere on the net - then go pick one up and have a look see.
Seeking enlightenment in this manner is going to be tough I would think.

[dude_man_dude]

The 40D is a great camera----the 5D seems to offer a little bit more of refinement to the pics----- is it worth the extra $$ --not for most people.


I think your thinking of investing in glass is a good idea. Good luck! :smile:

thanks stathunter. I guess I should have gotten a feel for the forum before posting a harmless question which turned out to be a nerve grinder. :lol:

[SoundsGood]

I love this thread! :)

[AdamLewis]

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

lol

wow

Im not even gonna bother.

[Halliday]

After the 5D is the 10D of course...no wait..... :|

[Perry Ge]

Hey man, I'm sorry if I came across as rude.

Speculation about the 5D's future will probably get nowhere, I don't see a replacement coming anytime soon because there's nothing else in its class from any other competitors, and an upgrade would take sales away from the rest of Canon's lineup. It's still a great camera though, has stood the test of time, and will keep being great even if it gets upgraded.

The 40D will probably beat the 5D in every aspect...Except image quality.

I agree that getting a 40D and investing in good glass is a smart way to go though.

Here's why I prefer the 5D. It's mostly because of the full frame sensor, as you say. This is the real biggie, and really the only biggie, and it has a few implications.
- Bigger photosites, very, very low noise. None of the 1.6x crop sensors will really come close to the 5D in terms of high ISO performance.
- Bigger viewfinder. This is a real selling point for me. The viewfinder is MASSIVE, bright, clear, easy to manually focus with, and overall just a joy to shoot through.
- Lenses. This can go either way, but I like getting the full field of view with my glass, and given that I do mostly landscapes and portraiture, the 5D is a real killer camera.
- Colours. Again, with landscapes and portraiture, colour and skin tones are important for me. I'm quite shocked by how little post-processing I do with my 5D images compared to my old 400D, even with the same settings, same exposure, same glass. Colours, skin tones, and the images in general just look much more natural and have more 'pop'.

I also shoot film, full frame feels a bit more natural to me.

Depends ultimately on what you look for in a camera. Some people look for features, bells and whistles, huge FPS (honestly...working on your timing for the first frame in a burst is more important than having more FPS), and all that kinda stuff. Others look for mind-blowing image quality.

At the end of the day though, it's all about the final images. All I wanted in a camera was crazy good image quality and a big viewfinder. The 5D gave me that. I find the viewfinder and image quality of the 5D are a joy to shoot with, and I that translates into a more enjoyable shooting experience for me, and better photos in the end. And that's what matters.

[Pete]

well, instead of saying "is this serious", why not give some specifics? I'm sure you are a "professional"....so, why not share a bit of your vast knowledge? I'm just saying, on paper, it doesn't look like there's a huge deal of difference between the 40d and 5d, therefore Canon will either replace the 5d or drop it from their line all together. It's three years old now, so one or the other is inevetible, wouldn't you agree? The question I posed is will this happen sooner rather than later? Why even chime in if you can't back up your opinions? I'm not here to help you build your egos.

Take it easy, mate... There's been quite a lot of speculation about whatever's after the 5D. Since nothing was announced at PMA, and Canon have said that they're not developing anything to directly replace the 5D.

This can mean two things. Either they're happy with the 5D as it stands (and the vast majority of 5D owners are happy with it), or they're thinking that other bodies will be more appealing to consumers (wether that's the 40D or the 1D Mk III).

My personal opinion is that the 5D is very secure in it's place and doesn't need updating. If you want other features, there are alternative bodies to buy.

My advice would be to take a look at what's available now and make your purchasing decision based on that. Waiting and speculating on equipment that's not even been announced isn't the way to go. The chances are that you won't be significantly disappointed if you buy something now. You'll quickly get bored waiting for something that won't appear.

[SoundsGood]

I've heard that the image quality difference between a 5D and a 40D is only noticable in larger than 8x10 prints -- and even then only slightly. True?

[JohnJ80]

Hey man, I'm sorry if I came across as rude.

Speculation about the 5D's future will probably get nowhere, I don't see a replacement coming anytime soon because there's nothing else in its class from any other competitors, and an upgrade would take sales away from the rest of Canon's lineup. It's still a great camera though, has stood the test of time, and will keep being great even if it gets upgraded.

The 40D will probably beat the 5D in every aspect...Except image quality.

I agree that getting a 40D and investing in good glass is a smart way to go though.

Here's why I prefer the 5D. It's mostly because of the full frame sensor, as you say. This is the real biggie, and really the only biggie, and it has a few implications.
- Bigger photosites, very, very low noise. None of the 1.6x crop sensors will really come close to the 5D in terms of high ISO performance.
- Bigger viewfinder. This is a real selling point for me. The viewfinder is MASSIVE, bright, clear, easy to manually focus with, and overall just a joy to shoot through.
- Lenses. This can go either way, but I like getting the full field of view with my glass, and given that I do mostly landscapes and portraiture, the 5D is a real killer camera.
- Colours. Again, with landscapes and portraiture, colour and skin tones are important for me. I'm quite shocked by how little post-processing I do with my 5D images compared to my old 400D, even with the same settings, same exposure, same glass. Colours, skin tones, and the images in general just look much more natural and have more 'pop'.

I also shoot film, full frame feels a bit more natural to me.

Depends ultimately on what you look for in a camera. Some people look for features, bells and whistles, huge FPS (honestly...working on your timing for the first frame in a burst is more important than having more FPS), and all that kinda stuff. Others look for mind-blowing image quality.

At the end of the day though, it's all about the final images. All I wanted in a camera was crazy good image quality and a big viewfinder. The 5D gave me that. I find the viewfinder and image quality of the 5D are a joy to shoot with, and I that translates into a more enjoyable shooting experience for me, and better photos in the end. And that's what matters.

This is a good summary.

From some of the engineering guys (in the camera business) I've talked to, the sensor cost represents about 55% of the cost of the camera (not the price - they are different). Going to the full frame sensor, a massive semiconductor, is very expensive. But, that is what you need to get the color and the low noise/larger photosites. That, believe me, is not at all a trivial difference.

I don't even hesitate a bit to shoot at ISO1200 or higher on my 5D. On my crop bodies, I was uncomfortable with the results much above ISO640 and for sure at ISO800. The 40D appears to be better hear, but it still is not all that close to the 5D.

If you are doing portraiture and/or landscape - point, set, match to the 5D.

If you are doing sports, wildlife (moving stuff at tele distances) then the 40D is the better choice.

J

[Perry Ge]

I've heard that the image quality difference between a 5D and a 40D is only noticable in larger than 8x10 prints -- and even then only slightly. True?

Depends what you mean by 'image quality' and 'noticeable'. Glass is gonna make the biggest difference in terms of say, sharpness.

Shooting at ISOs above 400-800...I see a massive difference.

The colours, contrast, and other relatively subjective, qualitative aspects of IQ on the 5D are simply superb. As mentioned before, there seems to be a magical, 3D quality about 5D images that I haven't seen from any of the 1.6x crop cameras.

[Perry Ge]

This is a good summary.

From some of the engineering guys (in the camera business) I've talked to, the sensor cost represents about 55% of the cost of the camera (not the price - they are different). Going to the full frame sensor, a massive semiconductor, is very expensive. But, that is what you need to get the color and the low noise/larger photosites. That, believe me, is not at all a trivial difference.

I don't even hesitate a bit to shoot at ISO1200 or higher on my 5D. On my crop bodies, I was uncomfortable with the results much above ISO640 and for sure at ISO800. The 40D appears to be better hear, but it still is not all that close to the 5D.

If you are doing portraiture and/or landscape - point, set, match to the 5D.

If you are doing sports, wildlife (moving stuff at tele distances) then the 40D is the better choice.

J

Yup, sounds about right. The sensor is certainly the most costly part of the camera to produce.

I agree about the ISO too. I used to hesitate just a little bit before using ISO800 - 1600 on my 400D - not much, and nowhere near as much as my friend, a Nikon shooter, does. She refuses to shoot above ISO800 :lol:. I would always first try to see if I could use a tripod and increase shutter speed, or stabilise myself a bit more if shooting handheld.

But on the 5D I have no qualms with cranking to 1600, 3200 to get the right exposure. (Remember, proper exposure is more crucial to good noise performance than anything else!)

Few more things here:

when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

I guess 'all you're really getting' is a relative statement. It's like saying why upgrade from a Toyota to a Jaguar when all you're getting is better engine and handling - the Toyota has more features!

And your 70-200 doesn't become 300mm. It stays a 70-200, with a chunk of the field of view cropped out.


And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

Yup, the 40D beats it in those areas alright. Just like the Nikon D200 beats the 5D in EVERY area. Except, again, IQ.


So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

That's exactly why any serious person would buy a 5D. It's not just 2 more megapixels, each of those pixels is larger than each pixel on the 40D, and it's because of the sensor size that this can be done.

If it had 2 million more megapixels, my harddrive would be full after 5 frames :lol:

[SoundsGood]

But guys... features aside, you've gotta admit that the 40D has closed the gap some when it comes to picture quality, high ISO noise, etc.

[Perry Ge]

Not really. I, and most others, don't notice much of a difference at all between the image quality of the 350D/400D/20D/30D/40D. It might be slight, but I can't see it - this is not to say that IQ on those cameras is bad, of course! Then there's the colour/depth/contrast factor, 5D images just seem to look nicer too.

With the 5D, I can see the difference, through the viewfinder and in the final images, and that's what matters. It's not a perfect camera by any means, but here, it really does shine.

[Az2Africa]

I have both the 40D and the 5D. I always pick up the 5D for portraits and landscapes ant the 40D for action and getting a bit more reach from a lens. Both are great. If I had to give one up though, I would keep the 5D. I like the "look" of the images better.

[TooManyShots]

Let's hope he is not the type putting a sub$300 lens on his 40d and called it the greatest camera ever made and known to men. :D

lol

wow

Im not even gonna bother.

[Kris_2020]

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:



Now how is the bigger lcd going to make your pictures look better? And if you don`t shoot sports the 6.5 fps isn`t going to matter as well.

[TooManyShots]

He would also need to know how to use AI servo mode focus and have a mid range telephoto lens with super fast focusing ring (USM). :)

Now how is the bigger lcd going to make your pictures look better? And if you don`t shoot sports the 6.5 fps isn`t going to matter as well.

[JohnJ80]

Not really. I, and most others, don't notice much of a difference at all between the image quality of the 350D/400D/20D/30D/40D. It might be slight, but I can't see it - this is not to say that IQ on those cameras is bad, of course! Then there's the colour/depth/contrast factor, 5D images just seem to look nicer too.

With the 5D, I can see the difference, through the viewfinder and in the final images, and that's what matters. It's not a perfect camera by any means, but here, it really does shine.

I would, however, be willing to stipulate that 40D might have better jpg processing than the cameras that have gone before - Canon has raised the bar on this across the board on their cameras - including P&S. But in terms of the RAW camera data out of the 40D being better than the 5D. No.

J

[jcjames]

Buy yourself a 40D, and be happy. Enjoy life.

I'm obviously not serious as I'm considering upgrading to the 5D from a 10D but keep heading towards the 1DmkIII instead - that's a further 2 mpixels less for twice the amount again.

Too much time worrying about how you can have the latest and greatest is the quickest way to a depressed life - I should know.

Cameras are all about taking pictures and being happy. Not worrying if there's 2% more noise in your shadow areas than some other camera which may or may not cost more money, that you read about, and that everyone else thinks is even better.

What's after the 5D ? Life. It keeps going on regardless of new technology.

;)


Well said............... ;););)

[jcjames]

Thanks John, this is the type of response I was looking for.

If I've rubbed the cat in the wrong direction here at the forums, I apologize....and I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone with a 5d. Obviously I'm new here, so my apologies. I'm on the verge of buying a 5d, but I'm thinking would I be better investing that money in more glass now and waiting for the 5d's replacement (if the replacement isn't too far away).

;) Investing into the glass is a good idea but the new 5D or it's upgrade is definitely not going to be cheaper than the current price of 5D... I bought a 5D after tossing between 40D and 5D; I went for the full frame, performance and high IQ. Of course, 40D is a great camera too.........Good Luck.

[snapzz]

Heard today on the Canon grapevine that the 5D successor will not be released until the autumn (fall).

[neil_r]

I bought a 5D last weekend. (Great price second hand from a friend who upgraded to a 1Ds MkII) I have a ID MkII N and the only reason I got the 5D was for the full frame sensor. It makes a huge difference in the studio and also for landscape work by keeping your wide angles wide. Don't underestimate the difference full frame makes over a cropped sensor. That in itself makes it very different (and I am not saying better) than a 40D

[jcjames]

I bought a 5D last weekend. (Great price second hand from a friend who upgraded to a 1Ds MkII) I have a ID MkII N and the only reason I got the 5D was for the full frame sensor. It makes a huge difference in the studio and also for landscape work by keeping your wide angles wide. Don't underestimate the difference full frame makes over a cropped sensor. That in itself makes it very different (and I am not saying better) than a 40D

;) Agreed......... I guess the only way is to test a 5D out and get a feel of it! I never knew it is so good until I actually use it.

[scomeau1]

I'm also in the market for the full frame Canon DSLR - I have been looking at the 5D this week and comparing it to my Canon 40D that I own.

The LCD and viewfinder on the 5D is getting old - 2.5 to 3.0 on the LCD is a big difference and no ISO on the viewfinder like the 40D.

Also I like the senser cleaning on the 40D

The 5D is a great camara with the " L " lens included in the kit for 2700.00 from B & H

But I just can't go back to smaller LCD and no ISO setting on the viewfinder so I guess I'll wait to see what the replacment for the 5D is going to like in the fall when most people expect it to be announced.

Scott

[SoundsGood]

I'm with ya on both points. I too like the nice large LCD on the 40D. And I love the ISO display in the viewfinder. It was a feature I really wanted, and I'd hate to give it up.

The only downside to waiting for the 5D replacement, of course, is the much higher price it will come out at.

[_aravena]

Perry, while a horrible car comparison , nice sum up. :D

Sounds like you need the new Rebel though...dude. Only half the FPS which most people don't use or can't find how to turn on the higher FPS *cough* :p and it's even cheaper than the 40D!!! With more pixels!!! *gasp*

Sorry...had to.

[Perry Ge]

Perry, while a horrible car comparison , nice sum up. :D

Sounds like you need the new Rebel though...dude. Only half the FPS which most people don't use or can't find how to turn on the higher FPS *cough* :p and it's even cheaper than the 40D!!! With more pixels!!! *gasp*

Sorry...had to.

LMFAO :lol::lol::lol:

And yes, I apologise for the car comparison, I know it was awful. I tried editing it a few times but couldn't get it any less terrible hahahaha.

[yonni]

Depends what you mean by 'image quality' and 'noticeable'. Glass is gonna make the biggest difference in terms of say, sharpness.

Shooting at ISOs above 400-800...I see a massive difference.

The colours, contrast, and other relatively subjective, qualitative aspects of IQ on the 5D are simply superb. As mentioned before, there seems to be a magical, 3D quality about 5D images that I haven't seen from any of the 1.6x crop cameras.

Funny you should say that. I was showing some pics that I took up in the White Mountains (CA) to some coworkers and one remarked that they looked 3D. The shots were taken w/5D+17-40.

[scomeau1]

I'm with ya on both points. I too like the nice large LCD on the 40D. And I love the ISO display in the viewfinder. It was a feature I really wanted, and I'd hate to give it up.

The only downside to waiting for the 5D replacement, of course, is the much higher price it will come out at.

Your 100 % Right, what do you thing the price of the new 5D will be with an Lens ?

Scott

[scomeau1]

Now how is the bigger lcd going to make your pictures look better? And if you don`t shoot sports the 6.5 fps isn`t going to matter as well.

It's not going to make any pictures look better - But it's a lot better than the 2.5 LCD that is on the 30D.

It's not all about the better looking pictures when buying a high price camara you have to like what you are paying top doller for when buying a Canon or Nikon camara.

Just my view.

Scott

[rockabilly808]

There's even speculation that there will be no successor to the 5D in the near future.

thats what I've heard, been told canon may be putting full frame on the back burner.

[elsen029]

thats what I've heard, been told canon may be putting full frame on the back burner.

Now that Nikon has the D3 (FF) out and Sony has announced a 24Mp FF camera? No way!

[snapzz]

thats what I've heard, been told canon may be putting full frame on the back burner.

Nope successor to the 5D is scheduled for release in the autumn (fall to some of you guys). This came from Canon.

[SoundsGood]

I think there's too much money at stake for Canon to not release a successor to the 5D.

[neil_r]

Let me understand this, so when Canon release a "successor" to the 5D all the pictures I take with my current 5D will be crap, is that how it works?

[aLFaDaRK]

Let me understand this, so when Canon release a "successor" to the 5D all the pictures I take with my current 5D will be crap, is that how it works?
That's what Canon's accountants would like you to believe, yup. ;)

[snapzz]

Let me understand this, so when Canon release a "successor" to the 5D all the pictures I take with my current 5D will be crap, is that how it works?

Not quite but Canon will say they would have looked even better if taken on the new/latest...................D;)

[rexspangle]

If the new 5d is better, which most likely it will be then yes the picture quality will be better therefore making it a better camera...(the actual pictures being better is a whole separate issue!)

The saying "it's not the camera it's the photographer" is often misrepresented imo. Show up at a job with a bag full of disposable point and shoots and try telling the client that.

A good quality camera more times than not can make a difference in the usability of an image... but this does not disqualify past photographs or cameras before its existence.

[SoundsGood]

Anyone know what the new 5D-2 will be priced at?

[JohnJ80]

If the new 5d is better, which most likely it will be then yes the picture quality will be better therefore making it a better camera...(the actual pictures being better is a whole separate issue!)

The saying "it's not the camera it's the photographer" is often misrepresented imo. Show up at a job with a bag full of disposable point and shoots and try telling the client that.

A good quality camera more times than not can make a difference in the usability of an image... but this does not disqualify past photographs or cameras before its existence.

The issue is that in the hands of a hack, even the best camera in the world is useless.

On the other hand, in the hands of the best photographer, the 5D MK II is worthless because it doesn't exist.

J.

[neil_r]

The issue is that in the hands of a hack, even the best camera in the world is useless.

On the other hand, in the hands of the best photographer, the 5D MK II is worthless because it doesn't exist.

J.


LOL your logic is incontrovertible

[cdifoto]

I'm very serious.... I can't see paying over two grand for the 5d when I can get the 40d for a little over $1000.00 when all you're really getting is a full-frame sensor. I personally like that my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm on a 40d.

And when you get right down to it, the 40d tops the 5d in a few areas....the 40d's 3" LCD vs the 5d's 2.5".....40d's 6.5 fps vs. the 5d's 3 fps. And you'd expect the 5d, for twice as much, would be sealed.

So, why should any serious person buy a 5d right now? For 2 million more megapixels and a full-frame sensor? Nah, I don't think so! :lol:

I agree. The only thing that wows me about the 5D is it's unjustified cult status.

[Perry Ge]

I agree. The only thing that wows me about the 5D is it's unjustified cult status.

The viewfinder is a refreshing 'wow' from cropped sensors, I'll say that much. To each their own really, but as someone who does mainly landscapes and portraits, I can safely say that I'm pretty wow-ed by my 5D.

[cdifoto]

The viewfinder is a refreshing 'wow' from cropped sensors, I'll say that much. To each their own really, but as someone who does mainly landscapes and portraits, I can safely say that I'm pretty wow-ed by my 5D.

Yer right. I looked through a 5D and compared it with the view through my 1D II and I said to jamie "wow those AF points are huge."

So yeah, the VF wows me too. :rolleyes:

The 1.6x do have kinda shytty viewfinders but since 99.999% of my shooting is autofocus, I can go from the 10D to the 1D and back again and it's no problem.

[Perry Ge]

Yer right. I looked through a 5D and compared it with the view through my 1D II and I said to jamie "wow those AF points are huge."

So yeah, the VF wows me too. :rolleyes:

The 1.6x do have kinda shytty viewfinders but since 99.999% of my shooting is autofocus, I can go from the 10D to the 1D and back again and it's no problem.

Ahh I do a fair amount of manual focus stuff, and when shooting landscapes as it starts to get dark, the large, bright viewfinder really helps.

And hey man, I'd love to have a 1DII :P, but I ain't made of cash. Also full-frame is a godsend for landscapes.

Given that I shot film for ages and the only DSLR I had before the 5D was a 400D, I feel a bit more at home with the 5D, it's a nice and cosy, fuzzy feeling, haha. And well, I know by comparing shots that colours (especially skin tones), high-ISO noise and stuff, that the 5D blows my old rebel out of the water, hands down. I also find that I'm doing much less PP because I enjoy the colour in the RAWs so much, and time saved is time gained :D.

To be fair, these are probably functions of better glass and maybe (yeah, right) even a bit more skill too :confused:

[cdifoto]

And hey man, I'd love to have a 1DII :P, but I ain't made of cash. Also full-frame is a godsend for landscapes.

You could sell the 5D and be about dead even on a 1D II. :D

[Perry Ge]

You could sell the 5D and be about dead even on a 1D II. :D

Really eh? I haven't seen a 1DII for anywhere near the price of a 5D, but heck, I'm not giving up the wide field of view on my 17-40 anytime soon :P.

[cdifoto]

I paid $2090 for mine with a shade under 7K (or was it under 6K) clicks I think in April or May of last year.