Thinking of Buying a 5DII

I have read dozens if not hundreds of reviews about the 5DII and 5DIII. I really want the III but can't justify it right now. So a few questions.

• How does the focusing system compare between my 60D and the 5DII?
  
• In what areas would the 5DII out perform the 60D?
  
• For portraits and real estate photography, would full frame offer any distinct advantages? If so, what?
  
• Where would you recommend I purchase a 5DII if I decide to do so? What is considered a fair price range, depending on condition, etc.?
  
• If I buy used, what criteria would I look for to ensure I don't get screwed over with a "lemon"?
  
• What lens would you recommend for interiors and real estate for someone going full frame? I am not a huge fan of UWA. I am thinking a TS-E 24 mm or 24 mm f/2.8? Would my 28 mm function well enough on the full frame for real estate until I can save for something more appropriate?
  

Just checking prices on Adorama. Is there really only $310 difference between the 5DII and 5DIII?

http://www.adorama.com​/ICA5DM2.html

http://www.adorama.com​/ICA5DM3.html

- One the 5D2 only the center AF point is usable for moving subjects
- 5D2 blows the 60D out of the water in terms of IQ
- For portraits yes, for real estate it depends - do you want wide tilt-shift lenses?
- Buy/sell section here on POTN or fredmiranda.com - $1400 for heavily used, $1600 like new
- Low shutter count (under 20k), reputable seller, PayPal etc
- TS-E 24mm. 28mm is a bit long. I'd get the 17mm TS-E

Get a used 5D2 or 6D. The 5D3 is only good for shooting moving subjects.

if you're going to be shooting real estate, just get the full frame because it's the only way you'll realistically be able to use the tilt shift lenses that you're going to need to buy as well.

Instead of a used 5d II, why not buy a brand new 6D for just a little bit more?

In RE photography you will be mainly using a 10-22 on APS-C cameras or a 17-40/16-35 on FF. Personaly, I think the images at 17mm on FF look better than the 10mm images on an APS-C.

Your results would also look great on an old school 5D.

LostArk wrote in post #16376611
- One the 5D2 only the center AF point is usable for moving subjects AGREE
- 5D2 blows the 60D out of the water in terms of IQ
In some situations. The 10-22 is sharper to the corners on APSc than FF with the 17-40 and has less distortion and vignetting than the 17-40 and 16-35 on FF.
- For portraits yes, for real estate it depends - do you want wide tilt-shift lenses?
- Buy/sell section here on POTN or fredmiranda.com - $1400 for heavily used, $1600 like new
- Low shutter count (under 20k), reputable seller, PayPal etc
- TS-E 24mm. 28mm is a bit long. I'd get the 17mm TS-E

Get a used 5D2 or 6D. The 5D3 is only good for shooting moving subjects.

As to the last line.... What? I am reasonably certain I could get a decent shot of a static object with the 5DIII.

The 5D3 is only good for shooting moving subjects. what a load of rubbish, ANY camera is capable of static shots, I shoot landscape with my 1DIII, it may have ability to shoot 10 frames per second but that does not mean it cant be put on 1 shot at a time. A friend of mine only uses the 5DIII for landscapes and I dont think last time I looked they were moving subjects

bmaxphoto wrote in post #16376594
Just checking prices on Adorama. Is there really only $310 difference between the 5DII and 5DIII?

http://www.adorama.com​/ICA5DM2.html

http://www.adorama.com​/ICA5DM3.html

Amazon has the 5D3 for $3,099.00 LINK

300 dollar difference than adorama

3,029.00 for the 5D2 on amazon ( not sold by amazon) LINK

I really don't think the 5DII is worth getting. Although I still have mine, it is relegated to strictly Liveview shooting. The 5DIII is just so vastly superior that it would be a shame to not push a little more and get that. I haven't tried the 6D or 70D so really can't say much about them ... but I would certainly think that if the 5DIII is out of the price range then the 6D would be a better choice than the 5DII.

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16377082
As to the last line.... What? I am reasonably certain I could get a decent shot of a static object with the 5DIII.

+1 ... Lol! If a camera does a good job taking pictures of moving objects, chances are that it will do a good job taking pictures of static objects as well

5d ii is good, 6d is better, 5d iii is legendary. It sounds like you want the 5d iii anyway, If I was in your shoes I would save up a bit more and get what you are after. Think of it this way, If you buy the 5d ii/6d, a few months down the road you may think to yourself: Damn! Wish I bought the Mark iii now.

I love my 5DII but time has moved on and a better camera is here so today I sold my 5DII to someone starting to want to go full frame on the cheap, its 18 months old and has the battery grip and extras and I think $1350 for it is reasonable, I will be getting the 5DIII next week, as much as I loved 5DII there is no way Id pay $300 less than 5DIII for it

aladyforty wrote in post #16377381
I love my 5DII but time has moved on and a better camera is here so today I sold my 5DII to someone starting to want to go full frame on the cheap, its 18 months old and has the battery grip and extras and I think $1350 for it is reasonable, I will be getting the 5DIII next week, as much as I loved 5DII there is no way Id pay $300 less than 5DIII for it

If you love you 5d ii you will be blown away by the speed and autofocus of the 5d iii. After a few years with the mark 2 then going to the iii, i was blown away! Good choice!

aladyforty wrote in post #16377096
The 5D3 is only good for shooting moving subjects. what a load of rubbish, ANY camera is capable of static shots, I shoot landscape with my 1DIII, it may have ability to shoot 10 frames per second but that does not mean it cant be put on 1 shot at a time. A friend of mine only uses the 5DIII for landscapes and I dont think last time I looked they were moving subjects

I think what he means is that the main advantage of the 3 over the 2 is when you are shooting moving objects, otherwise they perform similarly.

milleniumking wrote in post #16377245
5d ii is good, 6d is better,

Disagree, 5D2 still has a bunch over the 6D

CF vs SD memory
1/8000 vs 1/4000 max shutter speed
36x24 vs 35.8 x 23.9 sensor size
1/200 vs 1/180 x-sync
98% vs 97% viewfinder coverage
25 vs 21 custom functions
Magnesium Alloy body vs only partial
150,000 vs 100,000 shutter durability rating
5616 x 3744 vs 5472 x 3648 pixel dimensions

I also disagree that only the center point is useable for moving subjects on the 5D2, but that has been disproven countless times (as in too many to count).