5D2 - First impressions

I have posted my first impressions HERE of the 5D2 WITH IMAGES if anyone is interested in the images

This is not a technical review, it is what it says on the tin, IMPRESSIONS. I'm writing these first impressions of the 5D2 as someone who has just upgraded from the 5D mk1.

Images in this PART 1 of my impressions were shot with the 24-105L and with EV 2/3rds , due to something I had read suggesting this was an adjustment worth making also because DXO rated the ISO settings as actually lower than stated and also because I wanted to push the highlights to test DR and the highlight recoverability in Adobe Lightroom (or ACR). More could obviously be done in Photoshop but Im only looking at what's attainable here by a) a non expert and b) QUICK editing.

I deliberately took these type of shots to push the limits ( not for artistic merit!:lol All images shot in RAW in AV mode with Evaluative metering and exported to theweb from Lightroom® (as jpgs obviously). Mouseover the images to access the photo info. Choose your preferred viewing style, top right of the page, unfortunately for 'photo info' to be available you will need to select a viewing style other than 'Journal'. Original size enabled for 100% viewing.

Things that are self-evident I will not make further comments on e.g. the resolution, it is 21MP, nothing more needs to be said about that! Nor will I comment on things that are the same or very close to same as the 5D Mk1, the new view-screen, controls layout etc. Whilst I appreciate these improvments they didnt present me with a problem in the Mk1 so they're not an issue in the Mk2. What I will comment on is those things that make a real difference to me.

NO NOISE REDUCTION applied to ANY of the images. only the most basic adjustments made in LR (or ACR). Unadjusted shots shown first, second version is after some adjustments applied. I will take some more shots today without setting exposure compensation and post them later.

Camera:
- On/Off button: On the Mk1 this was prone to turing itself on or off while it rubbed against your body as you carried it, and this really bugged me; now on the Mk2 its positioning is better in that it is slightly smaller and stands less proud of the body in relation to the view screen and wheel dial, both of which now give it some slight protection against accidental changing. We'll see if it's better in practice.
- Viewfinder: on the Mk1 I found that it was hard to see the edges of the frame in one glance, the Mk2 is better in this regard, the VF is a distinct improvement
- Top info window: the Av and Tv settings appear larger. This is good.
- more customisable settings on the mode dial - excellent!
- Rubber seal on baseplate came off accidentally while I was checking over the camera for the first time. I pushed it on firmly but it is still too loose IMO. People are going to lose those, mark my words.
- The resolution is great, probably the lenses are more the limiting factor now rather than the sensor.
- The camera handles better and has improvements overall such that you really feel it is a state of the art high spec upgrade worthy of succeeding the Mk1
- The huge files generated by the Mk2 make me wish I could afford to upgrade my computer as well (Apple G5 2.3 ppc). Lightroom® is much slower and I expect Photoshop® and Bridge® will be too
- The camera has the improvements I hankered after, better VF, screen, mode dial etc. It's a lovely camera, I really like it.


Images:
- The wide DR and ultra resolution is there, but the post processing workflow is going to need to be relearned to get the best from the Mk2
- I hope ACR and LR will get upgrades that work better with the 5D2, because as it stands Canon's own DPP produces better results noise-wise and colour-wise (google for examples)

- CONCLUSION: There are many small differences between the images that the two cameras produce and many small differences between the two cameras themselves but in my book it all boils down to one single difference: if you want the super high resolution of the 21MP sensor then the get the Mk2; if however you value the beautiful creamy quality to your images over sheer resolution, then stick with the Mk1, as the Mk2 just does not have the creamy quality of the Mk1

For me, I'll stick with the Mk2 because I really want the resolution, but I do miss that creaminess that was exclusive to the Mk1

Nice real world review.

I agree with what you say in your last paragraph. I don't need 21mp so the upgrade isn't worth it to me at this point. The only feature that I would really like to have is the micro-AF adjust. I'll wait a year or so for the 5DII prices to drop and then I might consider picking up a used one at that time.

Thanks Simon.

A lot of reviews I'm reading these days just make me appreciate just how good the original 5D is.

Nice write up, thanks for sharing..

Nice writeup - interesting comment about lenses being your limiting factor now: unless you felt the same way about the 20D/30D, that shouldn't be the case, since the 5DMKII has the same pixel density as they do.

perryge wrote in post #7022937
Nice writeup - interesting comment about lenses being your limiting factor now: unless you felt the same way about the 20D/30D, that shouldn't be the case, since the 5DMKII has the same pixel density as they do.

I have no idea really whether they are or not but it was what I had read. The point though is that b21MP is enough resolution for me for my forseeable future

So they left out the Pixie Dust®?

TheHoff wrote in post #7023050
So they left out the Pixie Dust®?

sure sounds like that

I've heard about the "creamy" quality of the 5D I but don't own one so I really can't fathom it. Do you have any side-by-side shots of the two?

TheHoff wrote in post #7023050
So they left out the Pixie Dust®?

over my head

what is that?

SwingBopper wrote in post #7023067
I've heard about the "creamy" quality of the 5D I but don't own one so I really can't fathom it. Do you have any side-by-side shots of the two?

No - because I no longer have the mk1, But maybe I'll try to get the chap I sold it to to do that someday together

I Simonius wrote in post #7022669
...the Mk2 just does not have the creamy quality of the Mk1

For me, I'll stick with the Mk2 because I really want the resolution, but I do miss that creaminess that was exclusive to the Mk1

Creaminess? Can you post a sample?

I don't know if I never realized my old 5D produced creaminess...

I Simonius wrote in post #7022669
Images:
- The wide DR and ultra resolution is there, but the post processing workflow is going to need to be relearned to get the best from the Mk2

I have to say, I haven't noticed this at all. One thing I loved about my old 5D is that the files needed so little work, and I find the same to be true with my MKII. I was nervous because people reported that the 1Ds MKIII files needed quite a bit of sharpening in post, but I don't find that I need to add any sharpening to my files in addition to what Aperture adds automatically (which is the same way it was with my old 5D). Personally I haven't noticed any difference in processing the 5D MKII RAW files.

perryge wrote in post #7022937
Nice writeup - interesting comment about lenses being your limiting factor now: unless you felt the same way about the 20D/30D, that shouldn't be the case, since the 5DMKII has the same pixel density as they do.

Resolution is definitely there, pictures are definitely sharper than 20/30D and need little if any post processing compared to the 20/30D.
Crops at 100% are definitely sharper.
Shots taken with the flektogon 35mm f2.5 manually focused using live view handheld
eg.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Great write up and pictures!