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 16 Apr 2014 (Wednesday) 00:27
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Is it worth buying the 5D Original"
Yes
113
84.3%
No
21
15.7%

134 voters, 134 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5D Original

 
mustangmike
Mostly Lurking
13 posts
Joined Apr 2014
     
Apr 16, 2014 00:27 |  #1

Here is a question for everyone?? Is the Original 5D worth getting as a first full frame camera along with full frame lenses??

Also, are there any big differences between the 5D Original and the Mark II?

Thanks

Mike




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
stang67
Senior Member
Avatar
385 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 16, 2014 04:20 |  #2

I voted yes. Why? They're cheap and fantastic. Sure, something like a 60D may make more sense to most, but with the 5D, you know exactly what kind of FOV you get with EF lenses and you get used to the different DOF characteristics so by the time you get the money to upgrade to a 6D or similar, you will know pretty much exactly what you're getting into.

Yes, there are many huge differences between the 5D and 5D II. Just google the specs of each, for example.


Canon 6D - Canon 1D Mk III - 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | Σ 105mm f/2.8 | Canon 400mm f/5.6L | Σ 35mm f/1.4 | 17-40mm f/4L
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CollegeKid
Senior Member
475 posts
Joined Mar 2014
     
Apr 16, 2014 04:41 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

I voted YES. Mostly because of the price. For what you get for your money, a good-condition 5D is quite a bargain. The 5D2 costs as much as a 6D. If I already had a 5D2, I wouldn't upgrade to 6D. But choosing between the two - the 6D is a lot more camera for the money. The original 5D is a bargain.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kepa
Member
94 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Hong Kong, formerly UK
     
Apr 16, 2014 04:50 |  #4

The 5D classic/mark I/original was my first full frame DSLR. I then upgraded to the 5D III briefly, before I had to sell, and now have the 5D classic again. For the price it seems to sell at now, they are a bargain, but best at ISO 400 and below, though higher is still fine for web use. If you have limited funds, get this and spend the money on lenses to get great image quality.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Somedude18
Member
133 posts
Joined Nov 2013
     
Apr 16, 2014 04:59 |  #5

Buy!
I strongly disagree with ISO 400 or less. I use mine with ISO 1000 and still get great results, however you don't want to print them on glossy paper on 4m x 4m... But normal prints and full HD screens --> great!


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CollegeKid
Senior Member
475 posts
Joined Mar 2014
     
Apr 16, 2014 06:11 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

kepa wrote in post #16837570 (external link)
The 5D classic/mark I/original was my first full frame DSLR. I then upgraded to the 5D III briefly, before I had to sell, and now have the 5D classic again. For the price it seems to sell at now, they are a bargain, but best at ISO 400 and below, though higher is still fine for web use. If you have limited funds, get this and spend the money on lenses to get great image quality.

Bezerker1986 wrote in post #16837579 (external link)
Buy!
I strongly disagree with ISO 400 or less. I use mine with ISO 1000 and still get great results, however you don't want to print them on glossy paper on 4m x 4m... But normal prints and full HD screens --> great!

I have to agree with Berzerker on this one. I used my 5D at 1250 with no issues at all, and 1600 if I needed it. ISO 3200 was a step too far, though.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,999 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 617
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Apr 16, 2014 07:27 |  #7

Still have my 5D, bought 2006, and still love it. The image quality is excellent and for fairly static (not ideal for wildlife) photography you will have to spend a lot more to equal/better it. By current standards the sensor is sparsely populated but if you look at prints rather than pixels there are more than enough.
Pity it doesn't have live view.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Apr 16, 2014 07:40 |  #8

I sold my 5D "classic" 6 months ago and upgraded to 5D II version, 2nd hand (the difference cost me 500 Bucks).

The upgrade was necessary for me, not really for the image quality (even if it's nice to have more definition & ISO possibilities), but for the control on live-view screen (+Magic Lantern): I have several manual lenses and the king of them is a Tilt-shift lens (24mm TS-E II). Moreover I like long exposure shots, so it helps a lot.

But yes, the 5D classic is still a fantastic tool even if recent full frame cameras like 6D offer more...

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brasher
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Atlanta
     
Apr 16, 2014 07:46 |  #9

If you shoot the same scene with the same lens, by the same photographer, with the same image size, and ONLY changed the body (Classic, MKII, MKIII), I believe you would be very hard pressed to determine which image was shot with which body.

I could have bought the MKII, but opted for the "classic". The outcome is I now have body that I can literally take anywhere and not care if it gets wet or bashed on a rock while climbing.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Somedude18
Member
133 posts
Joined Nov 2013
     
Apr 16, 2014 07:58 |  #10

I can't help with bird photography experience. However, running-dogs-action the 5Dc keeps up very well. The burst isn't impressive, but with my cheap 70-210mm F4 lens and the center focus point on AI-SERVO, it still gives me satisfying results.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Apr 16, 2014 08:02 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

st3mpy wrote in post #16837765 (external link)
If you shoot the same scene with the same lens, by the same photographer, with the same image size, and ONLY changed the body (Classic, MKII, MKIII), I believe you would be very hard pressed to determine which image was shot with which body.

I could have bought the MKII, but opted for the "classic". The outcome is I now have body that I can literally take anywhere and not care if it gets wet or bashed on a rock while climbing.

Depends on a few things:

1. What ISO are you shooting at. You get progressively better high ISO results as you go from 5d - 5d2 - 5d3.

2. Depends on how big you print the photo. The extra pixels of the 5d2/5d3 do really make a difference on photos greater than 11x14.

3. Depends on how critical focus is. Without liveview, you are depending on the AF system to basically nail focus. With Liveview, you can zoom in 10x and nail exact focus.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kepa
Member
94 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Hong Kong, formerly UK
     
Apr 17, 2014 00:00 |  #12

CollegeKid wrote in post #16837644 (external link)
I have to agree with Berzerker on this one. I used my 5D at 1250 with no issues at all, and 1600 if I needed it. ISO 3200 was a step too far, though.

I didn't say that the quality above ISO 400 was not good, but it is certainly noticeably better at ISO 400 than ISO 800 (with slight pixel peeping) when printing. I said above ISO 400 was still fine for web use. I've shot at all native ISO's with the 5D, and love the film like results it gives on the higher ISOs, but I try hard to avoid it if I were printing. Since most of the time it is for web use, all native ISOs, if exposed properly, is fine.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Super ­ Secret
Member
48 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2013
     
Apr 17, 2014 00:22 |  #13

What kept me away from the 5Dc was the lack of MFA. MFA really helps fine tune a few of my lenses af accuracy. Even if it's a minor adjustment, it helps with second hand & older lenses.


Flickr (external link)
Canon 6D, Sony A7, 15mm f/2.8, Sigma 35mm f/1.4, Canon 40mm f/2.8, Canon 50mm f/1.8, Sigma 85mm f/1.4, Canon 135mm F/2.0L, manual lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,089 posts
Gallery: 1546 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 9964
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Apr 17, 2014 00:25 |  #14

Heya,

Depends on what you're shooting.

The 5D, while a good camera, is weak in a few areas by today's standards. That would be ISO and resolution. But, it is still a good camera for certain things. I would not buy it for night work, like wide field astrophotography. I wouldn't buy it for wildlife/birding/sport​s. I would not get it to do large print work, but I would print normal sized stuff if my goal was to print (like 8 x 10's for family, or if working for people, being up front with clients about the size they can print up to).

What I would buy it for, if it was going to be my only full frame camera (or the only dSLR I was going to have, for that matter) is for portrait, macro and general shooting (street, travel) with flash and with good natural light. The benefits of the full frame sensor is that you can get the most narrow depth of field with really wide aperture lenses, so you can make those dreamy shots where subjects really stand out isolated in a blurry bokeh swirl. ISO won't matter as much if you're shooting flash, you can mix it with ambient light for the studio look even outdoors. The resolution is smaller, but for portraiture this is less of an issue (no one wants to see absolute murderous detail on a portrait because we're just not perfect, and we don't want all the little lines, bumps, hairs, etc, to print if you're not spending hours cleaning them up) unless they want to print huge prints (even then a canvas print can make up for that actually).

The 5DII has marked advantages. Almost double the resolution ability (not quite, but you get the idea, way more pixels on target, lets you print larger at the end of the day). Big difference in ISO, several stops of ISO available. Better LCD for looking at your work before you move on and don't realize you missed something. But it's a $1000 difference, used.

I'd happily shoot the 5D classic, with an 85mm F1.4 lens, or 35mm or 50mm F1.4 lens, with off camera flash, for portraiture inside & outside and print it. But I wouldn't use it for the other stuff I do at all.

For the cost of the 5DII, I'd rather just have the 6D honestly.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GregoryF
Goldmember
Avatar
2,309 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Magalia, CA
     
Apr 17, 2014 00:56 |  #15

I can use iso 1600 with no problems and 3200 is fine if exposed properly and hit with a little noise reduction. The noise pattern on the 5d is very grain like with very little color noise that you find with crop cameras.


6D, 5D, 7D, 50D, 40D, Xsi, PENTAX mx-1, Sony a6000, Sony a3000 too many lenses, flashes and aux. gear to list!:cool:
A simple hobby gone horribily wrong

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

6,447 views & 0 likes for this thread
5D Original
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 astrobalcony
804 guests, 222 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.