5D vs 5D MK II

Before I switched from Sony to Canon I bought a used 5D along with a 70-200 f2.8IS that had a ton of scratches on it for cheap($900) and used it for a week or so to see if I liked Canon over my Sony A700. I figured I would be able to sell the Canon setup for at least what I paid for it and I actually sold them for a profit. I loved the way the pictures looked so after I sold it I bought the 5D MK II and I love the pictures I get from it. I do remember the 5D pics to have a different look which I liked very much and after reading many post about how the 5D files have a special look to them which I think I know what people mean but not being a professional I really don't know how to evaluate a photo except for the way my eyes see it. Lately I have been thinking of picking up a cheap 5D classic (around $300) and see if there is a difference. Does anybody here have both and could post a picture using both cameras with the same subject and same settings to see if there is a difference?

I've got both, but the truth is with a little bit of post work its difficult to tell the difference.

I have both and I do prefer the 5D images over the 5D2. I do agree with what gonz said. When I need ISO over 3200 I always pick up the mark ll. Oh I moved from a sony a200 and a700 to canon and it has been one of the best moves I've made in photography. The other was moving to ff.