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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 24 Oct 2012 (Wednesday) 07:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6D worse than 5D Mk II?

 
Ghost240sx
Senior Member
Avatar
412 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Nov 2010
Location: West Chester, Pa
     
Oct 24, 2012 15:34 |  #31

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #15164172 (external link)
the replacement for the 5Dmk2 is the 5Dmk3. the 5Dmk2 is end of life and it was never considered by canon for it to drop in to lower class type camera. The reason it was on sale because they have new stock, what's the best way to get rid of stock, keep selling it until it's gone.

the 6D is designed for experienced enthusiast/hobbyist type person that is after full frame. it's not a FF rebel/60D because if it was it would be made of plastic, have a flash and have the auto modes.

Everyone likes things linear but that's not the case. Even canon say this.

Why??? so you want to see a fault and you take a photo that shouldn't be taking in the first place and push it beyond what one would normally do. You should always get correct exposure in the camera first.

This is an absolute joke. End of life? In terms of technology? Arguable. In terms of capability to produce beautiful images, not at all. Remember that this argument that the OP has presented is his FIRST DSLR. He cites no prior photographic experience or etc.

5DMKII is more than capable. Hell a 5D is more than capable but lacks the desired video capabilities. This is literally a spec pissing match that will not lead to him taking better photographs but just having great equipment.


"The challenge is to make the best possible choices in how to take a photograph that can impart that feeling of awe or excitement to the person that views it."-Rob573

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
56,410 posts
Likes: 3073
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 24, 2012 16:00 |  #32

Ghost240sx wrote in post #15164400 (external link)
This is an absolute joke. End of life? In terms of technology? Arguable. In terms of capability to produce beautiful images, not at all. .

I believe he/she is saying that the 5DMkII has come to it's manufacturing EOL. No more 5DMkIIs are going to be built. THe 5DMkIII is the replacement for the MkII. At least that's how I read 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
Mark0159
I say stupid things all the time
Avatar
12,932 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 283
Joined Mar 2003
Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
     
Oct 24, 2012 16:11 |  #33

Ghost240sx wrote in post #15164400 (external link)
This is an absolute joke. End of life? In terms of technology? Arguable. In terms of capability to produce beautiful images, not at all. Remember that this argument that the OP has presented is his FIRST DSLR. He cites no prior photographic experience or etc.

5DMKII is more than capable. Hell a 5D is more than capable but lacks the desired video capabilities. This is literally a spec pissing match that will not lead to him taking better photographs but just having great equipment.

Oh didn't you know, all Mk2's are now dead! can't not be used unless you buy the mk3.

gjl711 wrote in post #15164502 (external link)
I believe he/she is saying that the 5DMkII has come to it's manufacturing EOL. No more 5DMkIIs are going to be built. THe 5DMkIII is the replacement for the MkII. At least that's how I read it.

Bingo :)


Mark
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/52782633@N04 (external link)
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 550EX -|- Film | Canon EOS 3 | Olympus OM2 | Zuiko 35mm f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RTPVid
Goldmember
3,365 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: MN
     
Oct 24, 2012 16:17 |  #34

Ghost240sx wrote in post #15164400 (external link)
This is an absolute joke. End of life?....

EOL is a manufacturing term. Your camera does not self-destruct at EOL.


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
iMAGEN ­ STUDIOS
Member
70 posts
Joined Aug 2012
Location: GUAM
     
Oct 24, 2012 19:22 |  #35

Here is my take owning both cameras. the IQ is almost the same from 100-800 ISO while i do see a slightly cleaner image on the 5D3. from ISO 800 up the 5D3 IQ starts to pull away slightly from the 5D2, though still relatively close.

Aside from the IQ being very close, the 5d3 Outperforms the 5D2 in every aspect and makes it a joy to shoot in situations the 5D2 would struggle.

I did not spend hours watching youtube doing comparisons between the two. I spent hours post processing photos from both cameras in real life situations. 5D3 files are cleaner, and can be manipulated much better then the 5D2 files.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TSchrief
Goldmember
Avatar
2,099 posts
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Bourbon, Indiana
     
Oct 24, 2012 21:03 |  #36
bannedPermanent ban

I have been riding the "5DII vs. 6D" roller coaster since the 6D was announced. My choice? I am buying a gently (I hope) used 5D classic. For 1/3 the price of a 6D and 1/2 the price of a used 5D2 I get: Same AF system as the 5D2, 1/8000, 1/200 and hopefully, more shutter life than the 6D is built with. I also get larger pixel pitch than either 5D2 or 6D. For someone just wanting to experiment with FF, this seems a really good deal to me. If I really knew I wanted/needed a full frame body, I'd be getting the 5D3. The 5Dc will suit me for now.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
39,486 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7924
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 24, 2012 21:08 |  #37

TSchrief wrote in post #15165751 (external link)
I have been riding the "5DII vs. 6D" roller coaster since the 6D was announced. My choice? I am buying a gently (I hope) used 5D classic. For 1/3 the price of a 6D and 1/2 the price of a used 5D2 I get: Same AF system as the 5D2, 1/8000, 1/200 and hopefully, more shutter life than the 6D is built with. I also get larger pixel pitch than either 5D2 or 6D. For someone just wanting to experiment with FF, this seems a really good deal to me. If I really knew I wanted/needed a full frame body, I'd be getting the 5D3. The 5Dc will suit me for now.

I think that was a very prudent choice. The only thing really poor on the 5D is the LCD and old style menu, but some like that old long scrolling list. It is a good camera!


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Oct 24, 2012 22:10 |  #38

Lowner wrote in post #15164143 (external link)
Absolutely agree 100% with this. Photography is an art, not a science.

Photography not a science (strictly speaking, science is a methodical approach to understanding the world), but there is science and engineering behind it, and if you understand those, you can do photography better.

So it's best for TheEngineer to retain his engineering mentality while understanding that as with all forms of engineering, it exists to accomplish a goal. Here, that goal is the art of photography.

The camera is a tool engineered from that which has been learned through science. As such, someone with a proper engineering mindset can understand the tool quite deeply, as well as properly evaluate it for his own artistic purposes.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Oct 24, 2012 22:44 |  #39

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #15164172 (external link)
Why??? so you want to see a fault and you take a photo that shouldn't be taking in the first place and push it beyond what one would normally do. You should always get correct exposure in the camera first.

IMAGE: http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120630014203/legomessageboards/images/f/f0/Facepalm.gif

When you're buying a camera, it's not just about what you would normally do, it's about what you might do. You're buying a camera to create images that, unless you're going to shoot in JPEG, you will be manipulating later. You don't know exactly how much you may need to push and pull your images in various ways, so it behooves you to get a camera that produces images that give you wide latitude for manipulation.

The bit about underexposing the image and pushing it to see the banding is strictly to illustrate that if you have to push any part of your shot by that much (and it's much easier than you think -- even just playing with the luminance of various colors in your shot can put you into that territory), you will reveal pattern noise that will make additional postprocessing required in order to eliminate it.

Whether or not that proves to be an issue depends entirely on how you use your camera. I'd say that since the OP is considering his first DSLR, deep shadow banding isn't really going to be something to worry about -- not until he learns what he's doing. But once he knows what he's doing, it could easily become an issue if he gravitates towards certain types of shots (e.g., landscapes).

"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JAbberwocky
Senior Member
373 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: SF Yay Area
     
Oct 24, 2012 22:49 |  #40

On the topic of shadow lifting and dynamic range:

Sometimes if you properly expose an image, you still have to lift the shadows in processing. (google the term "fill flash" and you'll see many examples of such photos, of course using a flash would work too, obviously)

Second. A camera which you allows you to deliberately under expose will let you use a higher shutter speed, this is a huge advantage shooting moving object (ie people at night)


Photography is not defined by what gear you own.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Oct 25, 2012 05:04 |  #41

kcbrown wrote in post #15165994 (external link)
Photography not a science (strictly speaking, science is a methodical approach to understanding the world), but there is science and engineering behind it, and if you understand those, you can do photography better.

So it's best for TheEngineer to retain his engineering mentality while understanding that as with all forms of engineering, it exists to accomplish a goal. Here, that goal is the art of photography.

The camera is a tool engineered from that which has been learned through science. As such, someone with a proper engineering mindset can understand the tool quite deeply, as well as properly evaluate it for his own artistic purposes.

Cannot disagree, but none of it improves the artistic qualities in an image. Modern cameras are amazing tools, but so far they lack the brain of a top notch artist.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scooby888
Senior Member
264 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Oct 25, 2012 05:12 |  #42

Interesting to read the different views on which is the best IQ between the 5DII and the 5DIII.

Being a 5DII owner my natural progression in equipment will probably result in a 5DIII purchase when the price gets sensible. While I'll be making use of the high ISO advantage I'd be annoyed at the thought that at lower iso the 5DII still trumps it.


5DII Gripped, 7D Gripped, Canon 60D, Tokina 11-16 f2.8, Canon 17-55 f2.8, Tokina 50-135 f2.8, Canon 24-70 f2.8 L, Canon 24-105 L f4, Canon 70-200 f4 L IS, Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS, Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L, Canon EF 100 L Macro f2.8, Canon 50mm f1.4, Canon 1.4tc mkii, Speedlite 580ii, 2x Speedlite 430ii, Monfrotto tripods

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neilgcart
Member
143 posts
Joined Sep 2010
     
Oct 25, 2012 11:16 |  #43

If you look at the posts carefully those that are claiming the 5D MK II has better IQ than the 5D MKIII in general do not actually own the MKIII or have not used both cameras in anger. You are not going to see large improvements with the 5D MKIII at low ISOs under perfect conditions but the improvements are there and it will certainly give you more consistently good results. This is my experience having owned and used the 5D MKII and now owned and used the 5D MKIII for several months in the real world.

Neil




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jaomul
Goldmember
Avatar
1,236 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 66
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Cork, Ireland
     
Oct 25, 2012 11:21 |  #44

Worse-IQ-5d mark II. An unusually high benchmark


flickr (external link)
Olympus EM5,Nikon d7200,
Olympus 12-50mm, 40-150mm,17mm f2.8,Nikon 50mm F1.8, Tamron 90mm vc, 18-105mmVR, Sigma 18-35 f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlexTakesPhotos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,125 posts
Likes: 80
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Denver CO
     
Oct 25, 2012 12:40 as a reply to  @ jaomul's post |  #45

Scapevision wrote in post #15163828 (external link)
If you want to be a great photographer you need to put the engineer behind, don't look at the specs of the camera, you gotta touch it and play with it before you decide. How many amazing photographers in the past had what you can see in the 5d? Zero

/thread


Flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link)

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

15,361 views & 0 likes for this thread
6D worse than 5D Mk II?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 Chris Parrish
795 guests, 250 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.