EOS 5D in my hands.....

Friends -

Last night I met a gentleman from the great county of Deutschland visiting our warm state of Arizona and he was sporting an EOS 5D with a 17-50mm Prime. After a few minutes of friendly conversation (since I just moved back from Germany) he allowed me to get a feel for his 5D.

My initial impression was "Now THIS is what a camera SHOULD feel like!"

My question: Is the EOS 5D the same size, weight, feel as a 40D or possibly the upcoming 50D and, is the EOS 5D a "BETTER" camera than the 40D and/or will it be challenged by the 50D?

Please, your opinions count.

Thanks

The XXD bodies are slightly smaller than the 5D, but they are pretty close in both size and feel.

The 5D is a better body for image quality over the XXD bodies as it is a larger format. This also gives it a larger and brighter viewfinder.

Some of the XXD bodies are better for certain uses like sports or wildlife shooting over the 5D because of faster frame rate, more up to date AF points and the high pixel density effect for heavy cropping.

Personally I find the 5D to be a better camera for all around purposes, but of course you must note that it is quite a bit more expensive.

Also note that the 5D replacement is widely expected to be announced this week.

BTW, your German friend probably had a 17-40 zoom lens. Certainly if it was XX - YY then it was not a prime, as a prime lens by definition is of a fixed focal length.

Finally- this is a Canon site, but given the amount of experience I glean from your post I would be sure to check out offerings from Nikon as well as Canon. Also spend as much time as you can researching what the differences really are in all these cameras before you buy, as photographic equipment is pretty expensive.

I own both. The 40D feels like lightening in a bottle compared to the 5D. But the 5D is superb where it might count the most to you. Image quality and viewfinder. Th 50D is liable to be a terrific camera, one worth looking at.

Thanks. I made a key mistake by saying PRIME. That would be like they call the "Nifty Fifty"? I thought PRIME was referred to lenses capable of f/2.8 and better. (Sorry) His camera had a lens that could zoom in and out. Had some sort of ring in the half way mark that was wider than the lens itself (image stablizer?) and it was just beyond the zoom ring.

Maxxum5 wrote in post #6305494
Thanks. I made a key mistake by saying PRIME. That would be like they call the "Nifty Fifty"? I thought PRIME was referred to lenses capable of f/2.8 and better. (Sorry) His camera had a lens that could zoom in and out. Had some sort of ring in the half way mark that was wider than the lens itself (image stablizer?) and it was just beyond the zoom ring.

All zoom lenses have two rings. One to zoom, one to focus.

Prime lenses have one ring, to focus.

Maxxum5,
I have both the 5D and the 40D and found them to be pretty darn close to each other in size.

Here is photos of 5D and 40D

John_B wrote in post #6306028
Maxxum5,
I have both the 5D and the 40D and found them to be pretty darn close to each other in size.

Here is photos of 5D and 40D


Here is the back view of a 40D and 5D


and here is a top view of a 40D and 5D

Hey! Thanks AlOT for that submission! It would be a long time before we saw a 5D around THIS area to compare with a 40D. So it really made me see there isn't too much difference in size. Thanks John!

elader wrote in post #6305476
I own both. The 40D feels like lightening in a bottle compared to the 5D. But the 5D is superb where it might count the most to you. Image quality and viewfinder.

Agreed - where it counts - image quality. I am continually astounded at the image quality of my 5D when an excellent quality lens is attached to it. Yes, it feels good in the hands, but the drawback is that it doesn't feel that great when hiking up the side of a mountain with it.

I just got ahold of a 5D the other day.. Lemme tell you it's quite a step up from my 20D. Granted, the 20D has a higher FPS rate, but for what I do (mostly nightclub shooting) the 5D is far superior in terms of image quality. I also agree that the 5D feels very nice in my hands, though it's controls are nearly identical to the 20D. And boy-oh-boy it's nice to have a larger viewfinder & LCD screen!

I saw a 5DmkII at the store and a 50D next to it, and noticed how the 5D is slightly larger. Not a big difference (such as between a Rebel and 50D) just a small difference. I was thinking of asking to play with the 5D, but I restrained myself cause I'm afraid I'll fall in love and not want to use my 30D anymore.

I remember when I picked up my 5d for the first time. I had just gotten a digital camera, but it was an xti. the xti was worth what I paid, I learned alot with it, but it always fealt like the quality was way down from the AE's and Nikon F's I had always enjoyed using. The xti fealt light and unsubstantial compared to even the rebel g I had owned previously. Then I got hold of a 5D with a 24-70 on it and my faith in camera build quality and feal was restored. All it needs is the whirring sound made by an auto film advance and I would be happy as could be. I will keep my 5D, it just feels right.

Maxxum5 wrote in post #6305117
My initial impression was "Now THIS is what a camera SHOULD feel like!"

That's similar to the comment my wife made the first time she looked at the ground glass of a medium-format camera.

It's similar to what I felt the first time I put a 10X loupe up against the ground glass of a 4x5 view camera.

In neither case, was that impression undermined by the results.

You just can't compare formats. Even when they come in a similar compartment, the larger format will always capture more light and, when making prints the same size, reflect the greater information it includes.

Rick "who takes the biggest camera he can carry" Denney