Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Nature & Landscapes Talk 
Thread started 06 Oct 2012 (Saturday) 13:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5d2 vs 5d3 for landscapes ?

 
johny39
Senior Member
567 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Windsor,Ontario/Canada
     
Oct 06, 2012 13:45 |  #1

Ladies and gents, advise me on this choice,plz!
I'm looking to get a new camera ;all i like to shot is hobby nature landscapes, capturing good quality travel memories; The difference in price for kit with 24-105mm is over 1000$.Does it really worth ? or better to get the D2 and extra lens? Does the advanced focus in D3 make a difference for landscapes photography? What other advantages offers D3 vs D2 for this job?
Sorry if this sounds stupid question, i keep reading about both cameras, see great shots with both and it's hard to decide.
Thx , any replies would be appreciated !


Canon 6D /Rebel T1i |24-105mm/ 18-55mm /55-250mm/Toki 11-16

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Oct 06, 2012 21:21 |  #2

The main difference between the III and the II is the AF. For landscape, you don't really need the AF of the III, so save your money would be my advice.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Oct 06, 2012 23:04 as a reply to  @ Sirrith's post |  #3

Yes.. get the 5D II/24-105, and with the savings.., grab a 17-40. You'll be set for landscapes. Tripod as well, if you don't already have a decent one.


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Oct 07, 2012 00:46 |  #4

I agree with the excellent advice already given. If you're going to shoot primarily landscapes (static subjects), then the 5D Mark II is the wiser choice...especially with the new lower price of $1,799. Take the savings and invest it into more glass.

Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Oct 08, 2012 14:25 |  #5

If I were in your shoes, I'd get the Nikon D600. Much better dynamic range, a necessity for landscapes.


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 08, 2012 15:31 |  #6

5d2 actually has more DR than the 5d3 at iso 100. Crazy huh?

Electronic levels would be nice, but not +$1700 nice. :)

D600 has the most crippled live view ever. You can't even adjust aperture in live view. On top of that you have to manually open it up out side of LV just to get critical focus. Canon doesn't have aperture driven by the mirror mechanism, like Nikon. So all of them can adjust aperture at any time.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,432 posts
Likes: 2392
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 08, 2012 15:37 |  #7

I pretty much agree with the others for what you need, the MkII is perfect. IQ wise it's a wash and if you are not needing the fancy new AF of the MkIII, then why pay for it.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
patrick ­ j
Goldmember
1,482 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 2334
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Denver
     
Oct 08, 2012 21:01 |  #8

Have you thought about waiting a couple of months and seeing what's up with the 6D? Sounds like it is going be a replacement of sorts for the 5d Mark II.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boingy
Goldmember
1,052 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Oct 08, 2012 23:11 |  #9

Some other minor benefits of the 5D3 for landscape are bracketing up to 7 shots, In camera HDR, slightly better high ISO for night photography.

With that being said a 5D2 + extra lenses/accessories is good enough if you're on a budget. The extra $ you save can get you a nice tripod/head if you don't already own one, various filters, pano setup, $ towards more lenses, etc...

Although we all have different needs depending on what we shoot, it really boils down to your budget now and in the future.


Flickr (external link)
Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
x_tan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,147 posts
Gallery: 137 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 462
Joined Sep 2010
Location: ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ 'ǝuɹnoqlǝɯ
     
Oct 09, 2012 22:41 |  #10

If I'm in your shoe, I'll rather to get some fancy lens for T1i or even 5Dc 1st - lens over body all the way.
BTW I own both 5D3 & 5D2 and I LOVE to shoot landscape & portrait. 5D2 does all jobs as good as 5D3.


Canon 5D3 + Zoom (EF 17-40L, 24-105L & 28-300L, 100-400L II) & Prime (24L II, 85L II, 100L, 135L & 200 f/2.8L II; Zeiss 1,4/35)
Sony α7r + Zeiss 1,8/55 FE
Nikon Coolpix A; Nikon F3 & F100 + Zeiss 1,4/50
Retiring  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jun2jun
Member
33 posts
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Indiana, USA
     
Oct 11, 2012 22:42 |  #11

I think 5d2 and 5d3 doesn't have much difference in terms of producing good photos for landscape.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jannefoo
Member
68 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2012
Location: .fi
     
Oct 12, 2012 00:52 |  #12

Less banding in mkIII.


my flickr (external link) | blog about panoramic photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCAsan
Goldmember
Avatar
3,836 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta
     
Oct 12, 2012 11:01 |  #13

Having had both....get IID if that is all the budget allows. Get IIID if budget allows.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,432 posts
Likes: 2392
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 12, 2012 11:06 |  #14

jannefoo wrote in post #15111377 (external link)
Less banding in mkIII.

Source? All the reviews/articles/sampl​e pics and pics here seem to show that other than the stronger AA filter leading to a bit more softness in the MkIII and the stronger use of software noise settings, the raw performance of the sensors are pretty much identical. If the MkIII has really sdolved the banding and pattern noise problem, I'd love to know as I am ready to pick one up and just looking for an excuse to do so other than the fantastic AF the MkIII has. For landscaped AF is a don't care.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 12, 2012 11:11 |  #15

gjl711 wrote in post #15112838 (external link)
Source? All the reviews/articles/sampl​e pics and pics here seem to show that other than the stronger AA filter leading to a bit more softness in the MkIII and the stronger use of software noise settings, the raw performance of the sensors are pretty much identical. If the MkIII has really sdolved the banding and pattern noise problem, I'd love to know as I am ready to pick one up and just looking for an excuse to do so other than the fantastic AF the MkIII has. For landscaped AF is a don't care.

It's sort of true. At low iso the 5d3 has banding in one direction, not two like the 5d2. 3 does have rather clean shadows at high iso though.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,664 views & 0 likes for this thread
5d2 vs 5d3 for landscapes ?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Nature & Landscapes Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dharmadme
887 guests, 299 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.