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 EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Oct 2014 (Sunday) 22:33
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5d vs 5d Mark 3

 
joelbroughton
Member
34 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 12, 2014 22:33 |  #1

So I own the 5d Mark 3 but I'm thinking of downgrading so I can use the money for other things. I'm curious to all you have used both - I know what I'm losing in speed, autofocus capability, video functionality, etc. but is the picture quality really discernibly better with the Mark 3? I do have decent glass which obviously makes much more of a difference.


5D Mark iii | 50mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,976 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Oct 12, 2014 22:45 |  #2

the 5D set the standard in (affordable) image quality 9 years ago, but you will see a difference today. I noticed a difference when I went from a 5d classic to 5d2


Current: 2x5DM3, 8mm fish, 17-40/4, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/4IS, 85/1.8, 135/2, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/2.8IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joelbroughton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
34 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Oct 12, 2014 22:53 as a reply to  @ timbop's post |  #3

Hmm. But how much? I'm sure it's hard to quantify, but I'm just trying to get a handle on how much of a downgrade the 5D Classic is.


5D Mark iii | 50mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
48,858 posts
Gallery: 151 photos
Likes: 5417
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Oct 12, 2014 23:24 |  #4

Image quality losses include;

Dropping your MP resolution nearly in half.
Going from 14 bit color back to 12 bit color -edited- (IMHO, this is a deal breaker for me)
Loosing the huge improvements that have been made with controlling noise. (another deal breaker IMHO)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Oct 13, 2014 01:44 |  #5

^^ The 5D is a 12 bit camera.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,199 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 427
Joined Aug 2009
     
Oct 13, 2014 01:55 |  #6

I started with a 5D and upgraded to a 5DIII last year. I was still happy with the image quality after 5 years. Overall, I was happy with the 5D except for the autofocus. The outer points were pretty much useless for my needs.

The megapixels were fine but I don't often print larger than 8x10. I do appreciate that the 5DIII has enough pixels that I can get a portrait orientation crop from a landscape image and still print an 8x10 at 300 ppi if needed.

The ISO capabilities of the 5DIII are impressive. I have some shots of my daughter at ISO 12,800 that simply wouldn't have been possible without a flash on the 5D. I still usually use a flash indoors anyway but its still nice to know the capability is there when needed.

Overall, the killer feature in the upgrade was the autofocus. Having something like 41 cross type points is a HUGE deal for me. The dual cross type sensors down the middle are also impressive when paired with a fast lens like the 24-70mkII which I rented this weekend.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carpenter
Goldmember
2,580 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 283
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Green Bay, WI
     
Oct 13, 2014 08:10 |  #7

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17209693 (external link)
Image quality losses include;

Dropping your MP resolution nearly in half.
Going from 14 bit color back to 8 bit color (IMHO, this is a deal breaker for me)
Loosing the huge improvements that have been made with controlling noise. (another deal breaker IMHO)


Aall of these would be a deal breaker for me. If you wanted to save about $1000 you could look into a 6D. That's as far of a downgrade as I would go. You won't lose any image quality at all. The ISO alone would be a huge factor for me.


5D Mk IV | 24-105L | 85 1.8 | 70-200L 2.8 IS MkII | 100-400L MkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,004 posts
Likes: 988
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 13, 2014 08:47 |  #8

Where and what do you shoot. In a studio the difference is small, for weddings the iso advantage is huge. For landscapes the 5Ds lack of a dust shaker would be a deal breaker. 5DII or 6D seem a better backstep.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brian_R
Goldmember
2,656 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
     
Oct 13, 2014 08:59 |  #9

why not just step down to a 6D instead




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,170 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 48
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Oct 13, 2014 09:48 as a reply to  @ Brian_R's post |  #10

I have both the original 5D and the mkIII and I am still happy to use the original one, although the mkIII is my main camera of course.

Used within its comfort zone, the original 5D produces great images (I am still getting images taken by mine accepted for national exhibitions) and you would struggle to tell them apart from the mkIII images except by resolution. For smaller prints (up to say 24x16) or web use, you would find the images from the classic equal to those from the mkIII.

However, the key part there is "within its comfort zone". If you need higher ISOs then you will see a difference (or be unable to shoot at all, as it only goes to 3200) so light needs to be good. The AF system is great on centre point, particularly with the assist points engaged, I find that it tracks very well. However the outer points are only usable in good light and even then can be dodgy if the lines of contrast are orientated the wrong way for the AF point. When conditions are good you will see little IQ difference between the two, in the end result, however the rest of the time the mkIII will be clearly ahead and often I have got great results from the mkIII in situations where the classic couldn't even make an attempt.

It depends what you shoot really. If you are primarily a studio shooter, and don't want huge prints, then the classic is still a great choice as you control the conditions and can keep them where it works best. There is also a certain indefinable tonal quality to a 5D image, with skin tones in particular, that is very pleasing to many people, even in preference to the mkIII.

If I could only have one body it would be the mkIII, however I would be sad to be without the classic as it still produces great results in the right conditions.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Oct 13, 2014 09:51 |  #11

The 5D can produce great photos if you are in an ideal environment like a studio where you can control the lighting and things are not moving spontaneously about. It can not compete with keeper rates against the 5Diii if the situation gets outside of these parameters.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
npompei
Senior Member
563 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Warrington, PA
     
Oct 13, 2014 11:02 |  #12

snake0ape wrote in post #17210251 (external link)
The 5D can produce great photos if you are in an ideal environment like a studio where you can control the lighting and things are not moving spontaneously about. It can not compete with keeper rates against the 5Diii if the situation gets outside of these parameters.

Great statement. The 5d, to me, makes files that the 5d3 can't compete with in that older, film, dreamy style. Give it good light and a stationary subject and it rocks. Put it in a dark room, with a moving subject however and there is no comparison.

Both are great - I use my 5d as a backup at my weddings mainly for portraits and I strap it to a 35L and it just plain rocks. 5d + prime = awesomeness


www.nickpompei.com (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Canon 5d3-gripped / Canon 5d / Canon EOS M / Phottix Mitros + (3) / Tamron 17-35 (2.8-4.0) / Tamron 28-75 (2.8) / Canon 35L / Canon 50 (1.4) / Sigma 85 (1.4) / Canon 70-200(2.8)IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dillan_K
Senior Member
Avatar
977 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 200
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Calgary Canada
     
Oct 13, 2014 14:02 |  #13

I have never shot anything but a 5D when it comes to digital, but I think the biggest thing you'll miss is the autofocus. My only real complaint is the autofocus. You'll probably miss the megapixels too, if like to crop your shots.


Gear: Canon 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2.8 Macro, 300mm f/4L IS, 5D, Elan 7, 420EX, Metz 52 AF-1
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,070 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5171
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 13, 2014 14:12 |  #14

the 5Dc produces great photos, but it cant deal with heavy crops well. As long as you get composition super good in camera, you'll be ok, and get fairly close results. High ISO, it's a complete blowout, the 5D3 is considerably different. The menus of the older 5D are ok, very basic. Biggest issue by far is the lack of Autoiso, then autofocus. both are annoying, but not a total deal breaker.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,856 posts
Gallery: 1270 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 8649
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Oct 13, 2014 15:57 |  #15

Heya,

Why not trade in the 5D3 and get the 6D instead. Pocket some money, but stick with a really good modern camera?

Very best,


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

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

4,298 views & 0 likes for this thread
5d vs 5d Mark 3
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 Susan Smitha
711 guests, 296 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.