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 14 Jan 2015 (Wednesday) 07:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Buy used: 5D or 5D II?

 
gdourado07
Senior Member
Avatar
258 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
     
Jan 14, 2015 07:06 |  #1

Hello, how are you?

I need your input on this matter.

I want to get a new DSLR.

The use will be mainly portraits with two primes (50mm and 85mm).

I currently have two options.

1- A mint 5D classic with only 8000 Shutter actuations and no dents, marks or any scratches. The price is 500.

2- A 5D II with 90000 Shutter actuations. The body is in good condition, but it's not mint. There are some usage marks, but not big dents.

Besides the shutter count, the camera might have been used for video.

The price is 650. Just a bit more than the 5D.

I have no interest in video.

Besides the 12mpx vs 21 and the AF On button and lens micro adjust, any other significant differences that would make the 5D II worth it?

If you were in my shoes, what would you do?
Is the 90000 shutter count a No No?


Thanks for helping out.

Cheers!


Current gear:
Fuji X100S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,210 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 1391
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 14, 2015 07:13 |  #2

The dust shaker (self cleaning) function is worth consideration on the 5DII. The 5DII will likely require a shutter box replacement soon so just add $250 or so to the actual cost of the 5DII. I have both cameras but the older one sees little use these days. The original 5D is a great camera but the newer one is more satisfying in the long run.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
modestglock26
Senior Member
293 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Georgia
     
Jan 14, 2015 08:37 |  #3

I've had both and got them both used. My thoughts are:

5d Classic: takes an amazing picture, but the screen and outdated tech eventually got to me. The high shutter count and lack of self cleaning left me wanting as well. Again, the pics were always nice on it, and the noise was just fine for my needs.

5d mark II - again, getting great pics with this one as well. Got it with only 8000 on it, so for me it was worth it to trade into it. The self cleaning system has already proven helpful, and I enjoy the newer tech/screen on it. I don't do video, so for me that isn't any sort of deal maker or breaker.

The shutter count is the only thing I would end up worrying about but I know that's just in my head. For the price difference, I'd go with the mark II and risk it. The mark I might need the mirror fix which will cost you as well.


Sony A7ii and a Ricoh GR II with just about no skill

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aswald
Goldmember
1,162 posts
Likes: 106
Joined Oct 2013
Location: London, Paris, NY
     
Jan 14, 2015 08:40 |  #4

gdourado07 wrote in post #17381693 (external link)
Hello, how are you?

I need your input on this matter.

I want to get a new DSLR.

The use will be mainly portraits with two primes (50mm and 85mm).

I currently have two options.

1- A mint 5D classic with only 8000 Shutter actuations and no dents, marks or any scratches. The price is 500.

2- A 5D II with 90000 Shutter actuations. The body is in good condition, but it's not mint. There are some usage marks, but not big dents.

Besides the shutter count, the camera might have been used for video.

The price is 650. Just a bit more than the 5D.

I have no interest in video.

Besides the 12mpx vs 21 and the AF On button and lens micro adjust, any other significant differences that would make the 5D II worth it?

If you were in my shoes, what would you do?
Is the 90000 shutter count a No No?


Thanks for helping out.

Cheers!

What kind of photography do you do?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gdourado07
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
258 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
     
Jan 14, 2015 09:08 as a reply to  @ Aswald's post |  #5

It will be used 80% for portraits with prime lenses (50mm and 85mm).
The other 20% will be when I take the camera out with me and do general photography.
Also might take it on vacation occasionally.

Cheers!


Current gear:
Fuji X100S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MNUplander
Goldmember
2,527 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 107
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Duluth, MN
Post edited over 4 years ago by MNUplander. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 14, 2015 09:53 |  #6

I've owned both - had a used 5D until I jumped to a new 5DII several years later. The 5D was a fantastic intro to FF but the 5DII suited my needs better in every way. Live view was great for critical focus on landscapes, the updated menu was much more intuitive, dust shaker on the sensor, much better screen to help with reviewing images/chimping, more pixels, better high ISO. If they'd improved the AF any in the 5DII I wouldn't have jumped on the 5DIII bandwagon so fast.

Having said all that, the 5DII with 90k actuations would not be on the top of my list - it doesn't sound abused but it's definitely been heavily used where the 5D has much more life ahead of it. Between those two specific cameras, the 5D would be my choice. But, because of everything in the first paragraph, if you can find some way to swing it, you'll be much happier for much longer with a 5DII vs a 5D.


Lake Superior and North Shore Landscape Photography (external link)
Buy & Sell Feedback
6D, 16-35 f4 IS, 50 1.2, 100L Macro, 150-600C

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scotchtape
Member
152 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2013
     
Jan 14, 2015 11:23 |  #7

I don't know how many photos the "average" photographer takes but if you just do "regular" shooting for fun, I doubt most people will rack up more than 10K per year.
It is like motorcycles, everyone thinks 20K km is "high" but they can go for 300K kms...

I don't know your financial situation, but the 5DC is ancient now but the 5DII is only "old".
Your camera is not going to implode when it hits 150K clicks... If those are your only two choices I would still get the 5D2.
The price is right considering the condition...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adamo99
Goldmember
1,173 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Mississauga, ON
     
Jan 14, 2015 11:25 |  #8

That's a pretty good price on a 5DII- even factoring in a shutter replacement which may not be required for quite some time.

The 5DII has more resolution, for cropping flexibility, better high-ISO performance, much better rear display, etc. I've had bodies going on 400,000+ shutter actuations without a hiccup, and others fail with < 4,000. Cameras will get marked up, dinged, scratched, etc. They are tools, meant to be used.

For the difference of $150, I'd get the 5DII, every time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lilkngster
Senior Member
721 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 38
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Jan 14, 2015 14:03 |  #9

$150 more for the features of the MkII is easily worth it, but $500 is upper end of the 5dc price range while $650 is really near the bottom end of the 5dII price range. 90K is a reasonable number of clicks, but I do not think that by itself is accounting for the $650 price. Unless there is some friends/family discount, you can test carefully, or there is some return policy in place, I would be cautious.


6dII/80d/1dIII|8mm to 400mm|Pro-10/100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,072 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6158
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 14, 2015 15:03 |  #10

5D2 EASILY.

it's a MASSIVE upgrade over the 5Dc. Like 1-2 stops improvement in high ISO, resolution, live view, autoiso, better rear LCD, better firmware, ability for a much better magic lantern. All things that really changed the game when it comes to DSLR's.

$500 for a 5D is the higher end price
$650 for a 5D2 is like a steal for that camera.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - 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 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Jan 14, 2015 17:38 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

Charlie wrote in post #17382424 (external link)
5D2 EASILY.

it's a MASSIVE upgrade over the 5Dc. Like 1-2 stops improvement in high ISO, resolution, live view, autoiso, better rear LCD, better firmware, ability for a much better magic lantern. All things that really changed the game when it comes to DSLR's.

$500 for a 5D is the higher end price
$650 for a 5D2 is like a steal for that camera.

I agree with you, for the most part. Claiming the 5D2 has ANY high-ISO improvement over the 5Dc is ludicrous. Of course the 5D2 is better at high-ISO; the 5Dc doesn't DO high-ISO. This is roughly equivalent to claiming a Peregrine Falcon flies faster than a concrete block. Of course it does, but the comparison is silly.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 834
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
     
Jan 14, 2015 19:46 |  #12

I own a 5Dc and it takes a nicer-quality image than my 6D. There's just something about the picture that camera produces. I used a 5DII for a brief time, and its images were much like the 6D to my eye. The Classic has the magic pixels. :)


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,072 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6158
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 14, 2015 20:03 |  #13

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17382619 (external link)
I agree with you, for the most part. Claiming the 5D2 has ANY high-ISO improvement over the 5Dc is ludicrous. Of course the 5D2 is better at high-ISO; the 5Dc doesn't DO high-ISO. This is roughly equivalent to claiming a Peregrine Falcon flies faster than a concrete block. Of course it does, but the comparison is silly.

back in the heyday, 1600+ use to be considered high ISO, not sure if still :lol:


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - 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 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,873 posts
Likes: 416
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jan 14, 2015 20:13 |  #14

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17382619 (external link)
I agree with you, for the most part. Claiming the 5D2 has ANY high-ISO improvement over the 5Dc is ludicrous. Of course the 5D2 is better at high-ISO; the 5Dc doesn't DO high-ISO. This is roughly equivalent to claiming a Peregrine Falcon flies faster than a concrete block. Of course it does, but the comparison is silly.

If you shoot RAW, there is no upper limit to ISO. A RAW image shot at ISO 3200 that is under-exposed by 5 stops is an ISO 102,400 shot. The only reason that there is an official limit to ISOs on digital cameras is that the manufacturers protect their image by limiting the amount of noise officially supported.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,873 posts
Likes: 416
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jan 14, 2015 20:17 |  #15

ChrisNL wrote in post #17382843 (external link)
I own a 5Dc and it takes a nicer-quality image than my 6D. There's just something about the picture that camera produces. I used a 5DII for a brief time, and its images were much like the 6D to my eye. The Classic has the magic pixels. :)

Pixels aren't images.

High contrast between neighboring pixels is not an objective quality; it is an artifact, which may, depending upon the person, also be a subjective quality.

I doubt that you are comparing images fairly; you are probably magnifying the 6D images more than the 5Dc images.




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

6,975 views & 2 likes for this thread
Buy used: 5D or 5D 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 ChazMaz
906 guests, 324 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.