I want to update my Canon 5D to a 5D Mark II or Mark III. I have done some research and the views seem to be pretty mixed on whether the Mark III is really worth the ca $800 price tag difference between the two. I would be very interested to hear your views. Also, have any of you made the upgrade from Mark II to Mark III and if yes, was it worth it and why?
All input highly appreciated. Thanks, Linda
I have a 5D3 and love it. Unfortunately, my upgrade path was 7D to 5D3 so crop to full frame
from what I hear, if you shoot alot of weddings, then yeah, its worth it. Alternatively, if your budget can withstand it, also go for it :)
I should add the caveat.. if you already have decent lenses...
Definitely the mark 3...and I would go a 6d over a mark 2...the 6d is newer technology and the low light capabilities are so much better than the mark 2 (the 6d has ISO 26500 mark2 6400) and added bonus of wifi and more focal points....to name a few.
I would love a mark 3 one day but love my 6d :)
I don't know much about the Mark III but I have a 6D and I love it. It's small, light and has loads of features. It can take pics in very low light as mentioned by @mummarazzii. I've never actually used a flash for anything other than some plain vanilla party portraits where everybody goes "You don't have a flash?" :)
I have the Mark III and absolutely love it. The ISO range is amazing, and the relatively low noise at higher ISO is well suited for nighttime street photography (which I really enjoy doing.) Focus is fast and crisp. The number of focus points that can be adjusted dynamically and quickly is also a very strong plus. Personally, once I had the Mark III in my hands I never looked back.
What is it about your current 5D that makes you want to upgrade? Think about the specific capabilities that you feel like you are missing and that should be able to help you figure out whether the differences in the Mark 2 or 3 will actually have a real impact on your photographs.
@archaeofrog good point Katie ..I have a 7D & like @toast i will eventually move up to a 5 for the full frame, although i love my 7D
hey if you have the resources go for it Linda
I suppose the two major points where the Mk III wins hands down over the Mk II are in the Autofocus system (61 point vs 9 pt) and max shooting speed (6 fps vs 3.9 fps) but as @frankhymus says, the 5D Mk II is old technology now.
Haha, "old technology"... I've been using the 5D Mark II for years, and I'd pit this "old technology" against anything "new" any day! ;)
An extra $800 for more focus points (I usually only use one, center focus... so I find the 9 it does have more than enough) and fps (yes... this would be nice but not at $800 extra... besides that may be of more interest to "spray-and-pray" shooters)... I'd rather save the money. No doubt the Mark III is a fantastic frame, but just not fantastic enough to pull me from my Mark II.
As anyone who has followed me for any amount of time could attest, I've abused this camera beyond its intended limits! It's been submerged in water, snow and mud. It's been thrown, dropped, and dragged. It's taken a tumble into a fire and been left out in -20 degree weather for hours shooting star trails (two nights ago in fact). All without a hitch.
When this camera finally gives up the ghost, I will most likely get another Mark II; not only because of the savings, but because holy crap this guy is a proven workhorse!
On a side note, @mummarazzii :
The ISO for the 5DMKII is much higher than you think; here's a shot I just took for this discussion ;)
ISO 25,600, check exif for more info ;)
Folks who have the MKIII love it, I have no doubt! But if you have neither, I'd recommend the MKII. :)
@archaeofrog Thank you Katie. My 5D is 8 years old. I would keep it as a back up. The thing I really dislike about the 5D is how it struggles in low light and in high contrast shots (LOTS of noise in dark areas). The 5D really served me well but it is definitely time to move on.
@frankhymus Thanks Frank. I have got a thing about second hand - just a personal tic really. I would rather save and get a new model if I can. I know I will look after it and it will serve me for years. I do appreciate that there are some great second hand deals out there but in this case its not for me. But good input. Thank you.
linda, the MK2 is as @grizzlysghost says, its a total workhorse. I've heard of wedding photographers who have this and the 24-70mm f2.8L and belt it over and over again and it keeps ticking.
If you're worried about second hand you could always go for a refurbed one from reputable place? The other point where the mk3 is good is it has lens corrections available which aparently make even mediocre lens perform well.
Personally, i've had issues with my Mk3 and had to send it back to canon twice now. Its been a real pain but I still love it. Plug the 85mm F1.4 on this and the results are amazing
Here's the thing - I can appreciate the speed advantage, but Iike Aaron I am totally at a loss to why I need would need 61 focus points? I set my 5D (9 focus points) to centre, focus, frame, shoot. What would I be doing with all those extra focus points? But as Ron @kannafoot pointed out - "The number of focus points can be adjusted dynamically and quickly" - so perhaps I am just being a stuck in the mud shooter and need to learn the advantages of all those additional focus points and how to use them!? My research showed the following advantages - focus points, speed, HDR mode (I wouldn't shoot HDR via the automatic setting anyhow), better video capabilities/capacity (not particularly interested in video). The thing that is making me doubt whether I should go for the MarkII over the MarkIII is mostly the age of the technology thing to be honest. One thing I am convinced of is the leap from 5D to 5D Mark II is a big one (advantage wise) and now I need to decide if I can/need to justify the leap from 5D II to 5D III. As a non- techie I am finding it very hard to make the decision…
All those that have gone for the 5D MarkIII love it , which is great to hear, but then so far no one has said that they also know the MarkII (as in, have used both).
Decisions, decisions...
As I said to Katie above - my 5D is over 8 years old and has been used a lot. I would keep it as a back up. The thing I really dislike about the 5D is how it struggles in low light and in high contrast shots (LOTS of noise in dark areas). The 5D really served me well but it is definitely time to move on.
@toast Thanks Weng. Yeah, I did also think though, that if I got the MarkII I could add the difference in price to a new lens as well. Can't stretch to both Mark III and new lens right away (having said that the new camera body has top priority right now). I know that 70-200mm f2.8 is just a brilliant lens - it is the weight that puts me off - but I reckon I'll just have to gain a bit more muscle...
I would also unquestionably choose the 6D over the 5D Mark II. The sensor has better low-light performance than the 5D2, it supports a wider range of ISO settings, it has a better autofocus system, a faster framerate, and will come with a warranty.
Pretty much the only things to recommend the 5D Mark II are that it can shoot at 1/8000th rather than 1/4000th, it can sync at a slightly higher speed when shooting with flashes, and it takes CF cards rather than SD cards (which is only a benefit because that's what you already have).
The naming of these cameras is really a bit misplaced -- the 6D should be seen as the replacement for the 5D Mark II, whereas the 5D Mark III should be seen as an entirely new camera range. The 5D Mark III moves the 5D from a landscape/portrait camera to a general-purpose full-frame camera, putting in almost the same autofocus system that the 1DX has, and increasing the framerate to 6 frames per second. This means that you can use the 5D3 not only for landscape and portrait work, but for sports, action and wildlife photography.
If you want a straight replacement for your 5DC that will do the same things but much better, and you don't care about sports/wildlife, get the 6D. If you find the autofocus and/or framerate on your 5DC limiting, then consider the 5D3. It's almost impossible to find a case where the 5D2 would be the correct choice over those two, an awesome camera as it is.
Your statement here really sums it up:
'The thing I really dislike about the 5D is how it struggles in low light and in high contrast shots (LOTS of noise in dark areas).'
The simple answer to this is that your new camera should be the 6D. The 6D both focuses slightly better in low light and produces slightly lower noise photos at high ISOs than the 5D Mark III, and will wipe the floor with the 5D Mark II.
@grizzlysghost I take it from your winky face you know this already ;), but the 5D2 is limited to a native ISO of 6400 -- this is the highest ISO the sensor can work at. H1 and H2 (which will appear as 12800 and 25600 in the EXIF) are taken at ISO 6400 and then boosted artificially by one or two stops. You can get the same (typically better) results as H2 mode if you shoot in raw by shooting at ISO 6400 with two stops of underexposure and then boost the exposure in your raw processor (this also allows you to better prevent blown highlights). H1 and H2 are useful if you shoot in JPEG.
The 6D and 5D3 provide a native ISO setting of up to 25600, with the boosted H1 and H2 settings providing a software-boosted 51200 and 102400 ISO.
I can't speak to the 5D Mark series, but can totally recommend the 6D. When I was looking to upgrade from the 7D to a full frame I spoke to quite a few professional photographers and for my needs they recommended the 6D.
You mention issues with noise and low light performance (I also had issues with both with my 7D). The 6D will easily win you over with its performance - instant focusing in low light and well controlled noise. It's also lighter and smaller than the 5DMark cameras - something I also wanted since I carry the camera around quite a bit. I purchased the 6D right before my landscape course last September and was very happy with the results.
Though, I still use my 7D for faster subjects (8 fps) over the 6D (4.5 fps). Something to consider if you shoot lots of action/sports.
@abirkill@kass
Thank you so much Alexis and Kass - I really hadn't considered the 6D at all (tending to be a creature of habit and stick with what I know kinda girl) but you have really opened my eyes. I will definitely go to a store and check out both the 6D and the 5D III now. I would use my new camera mostly for portrait and event work. Sports / action photography is not of particular interest to me.
@grizzlysghost My answer to that is always 'it's really not worth it, wait for the 5D4'. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be very good at conveying that message!
I know four friends with 5D2s, advised all of them not to bother upgrading to the 5D3, which they all agreed with until they saw and played with my 5D3, and three of the four have now upgraded!
Interestingly, in all cases it wasn't the improvement in image quality (which is, in the scheme of things, not that huge) that convinced them, as they already knew about that. It was all the little extra features like the ability to do up to 7 bracketed shots, dual memory card slots, the built-in level, the more sensitive live view, etc. that persuaded them. Canon have done a nice job with the 5D3 and 6D of adding on lots of little features that add up to make it nicer to use, even though they rarely have a direct impact on the final image.
Ha ha, I just recently bought a 5Dc off ebay for $300 just to try full frame. I am so behind the times, I feel like I'm using a museum piece! It sits nicely with my 500d and will do me nicely as I am learning. @happysnap whatever you choose have fun and enjoy!
@soren Many thanks for going to the trouble to show me that Jake. I live in Switzerland so importing from the US is not really an option for me. I would prefer to have a warranty here really . But your thought was much apppreciated.
I asked the question of this group a few weeks ago about which APS-C body to upgrade to out of the 600d and the 70d iirc.... the outcome of that discussion was to ditch the crop sensor and go full frame so I now find myself in the same boat of wondering if the 5d mk3 is worth the extra ££'s. It does seem to have a few really desirable features that are simply not on any other consumer level body. I have been looking at the 6d as a really close contender and the price may just swing it as I have found a 6d body for just less than £1000 brand new and that would allow me to pick up either the canon EF 24-105 F4 L or the sigma 24-70mm f/2.8. Since I am upgrading from a crop sensor I would need to get a decent walkabout lens to pair it up with.
My conclusion regards my own dilemma is that we are all completely bonkers and allow ourselves to get way too carried away... does this mean that I don't want to upgrade to the 5d mk3? No... but after reading this thread I have looked again at the 6d and I am edging towards that one now for purely financial reasons.... Can I live without a 61 point AF system and 2 memory card slots?.... for the difference in price, probably.... would I still like to have them? Who wouldn't?
Side by side though on paper the 6d does seem to outdo the 5d mk2 on a few things though but there are obviously people here who love theirs and I have never used either so can't say either way.
After all that rambling... I am still undecided and will probably remain so until I eventually just put my hand in my pocket and flip a coin. Let me know which one you decide to come down on and how it works out for you =)
Glad to hear I am not alone GB - it is horrible when you can't quite make the decision isn't it - especially when so much money is involved. After the great input on this thread I am really wondering if I am actually more drawn to the 5dIII on some kind of 'snobby' level almost i.e. it is so much more expensive than the 6D it must be so much better! But that is actually ridiculous considering the input from Alexis and the reports I have subsequently read. Out of interest Alexis @abirkill what swayed you to the 5DIII compared to the 6D? I.e. which elements of the 5D III were of particular importance to you?
I think one of the deciding factors for me will also probably be when I have held the two in my hands and had a look at them 'live' as well as all the stats. Yeah, sure, I'll let you know how I decide. You do the same and we can compare notes.
I look at the work done on here by people on "old" cameras and am amazed at the depth of quality. Truly, at the end of the day the camera doesn't make a huge difference in my humble opinion.
However it is great fun to have new gear and a joy to use some of these incredible cameras and all the bells and whistles!
Oh I agree Keith. It is not just about the equipment at all! I am also not a constant upgrader (hence lack of knowledge on lastest equipment), but I really need a reliable update that I will use a lot, for a very long time. If I am forking out for a good upgrade then I feel I ought to inform myself and get the best I can afford and that suits my needs. Luckily there are a lot of knowledgable people on here who are happy to share their technical knowledge.
If anyone has any relevant points either way on the discussion you you please also tag me as I would love any help in my decision making process too! =)
@happysnap Firstly, the 6D wasn't available when I bought my 5D3 (although it had been announced and could be pre-ordered). It was also priced only about $600 under what the 5D3 was selling for, which made it a lot more questionable in terms of value for money than it is today, where it sells for around $1000-$1300 less than the 5D3.
Also, the performance of the 6D was still an unknown factor, with no reviews of production units available. The general expectation was that the 6D wouldn't perform amazingly well, being on par or worse than the 5D Mark II, but it turned out to be pretty much on a par with the 5D Mark III for image quality (and indeed, slightly better at high ISOs)
For the $600 difference in price, the higher framerate and awesome autofocus system on the 5D3 made it, for me, the better choice. I'm extremely picky about image sharpness, and was constantly frustrated with the autofocus performance on my previous Canon crop-frame cameras, so the chance to get the best autofocus system ever made by Canon was, while overkill, a tempting proposition (and one I've not been disappointed in). I was spending $6000 including lenses, and the 10% extra over the unknown quantity of the 6D (at that time) was a pretty easy choice to make.
I absolutely don't regret purchasing the 5D3 as it's a stunning camera, but if you don't absolutely need the framerate and autofocus benefits, the current very competitive price of the 6D (at least in the US) makes it very hard to justify spending the considerable extra cash to get the 5D3 today.
@abirkill Thank you very much Alexis for the very helpful reply.
I highly respect your opinion and you always offer and share your expertise so readily - thank you!
@gazbadger I am sure Alexis' input above will interest you too.
@happysnap 61 focus points? The focus points are spread over a much wider area of the frame, and as such much more accurate for dynamic tracking Auto Focus. AF-C (continuous servo in Nikon speak). You are right, it makes little difference with a single, stationary target, grab focus (and exposure lock if you need to) then reframe before the final shutter half press. Or full press if you have "back button" or "other button" focus.
@abirkill@happysnap Agreed.... quite a helpful summary, thanks very much for that Alexis. I think probably more than ever I am swayed towards the 6d although that AF system on the 5d3 is still very tempting... I may well hold out for that yet but as far as it goes it is a lot extra for a few slight improvements..... once I have settled on which body to go for I expect I will then be starting a discussion on which EF lenses people recommend.... don't worry though Linda, I won't hijack your post =)
@frankhymus I think you're right Frank... it's more for action/wildlife/sports photography where that level of AF will come into it's own... although I have been quite dissatisfied with the AF on my current camera but I expect that even upgrading to the 6d will be a significant improvement on the AF used in my little 1100d =)
@gazbadger No worries GB - I have really gained such a lot of helpful info on here today - I now need to go and take a look at the cameras "live" as well and see what best prices I could actually get. Although my main focus is definitely on a new body (ha ha, that would be cool too) I will watch your "which lens" thread with great interest and hope it doesn't make me want to go out and make another purchase straight away….
@happysnap Haha.... for me it's a matter of necessity since I am upgrading from a crop sensor so my main lens is an ef-s fitting.... I have a long lens and a 50mm prime I can still use but I will probably miss my main lens since it's really quite a good one. Hopefully it will fetch few pennies towards my new gear though... I kind of wish I could keep it as a backup but if I am jumping in both feet first for the top end of the camera market then every penny counts! =P
@gazbadger Oh, it will. Not being a Canonite, I did take out the 6d for a day rent with the 24-70 f/2.8 and it was a great experience. Interesting to hear Alexis talk about Auto Focus problems on Canon APC-S bodies. Perhaps that was before the 70d. It sounds awesome with its on-chip dual pixel phase detection. I have only read about it. Finally catching up to the mirrorless systems who led the way here I guess.
@frankhymus I guess maybe the 70d was after Alexis made the transition to full frame but I have certainly noticed a sluggishness in the AF on mine and it's one of the reasons for me upgrading. I did consider the 70d which would allow me to keep my current lens collection but after a little looking and a whole lot of persuasive talk on my discussion thread I made the choice to go FF.
@frankhymus@gazbadger interestingly enough, ive read some articles that basically state that while the dual pixel detection is alot faster, its not as precise as the old focusing mechanism...
@gazbadger erm, i dont have the 70D so i dont know... all i know is seeing some things about it. This isnt an article about it but I couldnt find it on a quick google search http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52481786
@toast Ah right... my mistake... I didn't pay close attention to your comment and refresh myself with the thread before posting... I thought for some reason you were talking about the 5d3. Reading that article you posted though it does seem to suggest that it's not a terrible AF on the 70d... although I am committed to transitioning to FF now anyway.
@gazbadger awesome, good choice. My issue at first was the "you should get a cheaper camera and should leave some money in the kitty for a good lens". What realistically ended up happening is that I bought a 7D, a good lens and a year later went.. hmmm.. i've got some extra cash, i'd really like a 5D3 largely because its a hobby and i dont have to justify it on the books - darn upgraditis
I think for me I should have gotten the 5D3 in the first place, stuck with my 24-105L and got a couple of primes and then later gotten the 24-70L or the 70-200L
@toast@gazbadger Following your twos discussion with interest. Off to the camera shop this afternoon to look at the 5DIII and the 6D. Oh but then I just know I will want a new lens to go with it….hmmm
@happysnap may be worth paying attention to the 6D's single SD slot. The 5D3 has a CF plus a SD shot, which gives me the added benefit of being able to record on both to minimize loss.
What i usually do is save RAW to CF and small jpg to the SD. The SD is actually an eye FI card which saves the images as small jpg and then sends them to my iPad as I shoot. May sound like a bit of overkill, but when i'm on photo shoots, it really does help seeing the image on a bigger screen when you're out an about. I know a 6D can probably do the same (i think?) but then you'd be saving both RAW + jpg on the same card.
@happysnap one more addition - how rough are you with your camera? from memory, the 6D isnt a full madnesium alloy like the 5D3 (and 7D) is. I'm not sure what this means about waterproofing for the 6D but when I'm out travelling, I dont really care about getting my gear rained on because the 5D3 with L lens can pretty much be shot in a shower
Good point Weng thanks. I am not actually rough with my camera at all ;-) But I might have to battle a bit more with the elements in the future as I plan on doing more outdoor work…
I am hoping I will "know" which is the right option for me when I have seen both "live" - what's the betting it is the more expensive of the two!! ha ha
@toast@happysnap For me what it has come down to is the 6d is cheaper but has the wifi+gps... this means you can connect it via wifi to mobile device with app and control camera from mobile device (a big plus for me). The 5d3 is more robust and has the better AF but significantly more expensive... I am still deciding which of these points will swing it for me! lol... would love to hear how your shopping trip goes Linda =)
I think I am going to have to go down to my local camera shop and spend some time handling them both.
@gazbadger here's something i've actually been interested in.. why would you want to control your camera from a mobile device? I couldnt think about a situation where i wanted to do this?
When I sat down and wondered about it, i assumed that controlling via wireless device means that i'd set up my camera somewhere to take pics and i wouldnt be there. Then I realised that I didnt want a camera that expesnive out in the open without me being there :D
@toast@gazbadger Ha! I was literally just about to ask GB the same question right this moment and you beat me to it Weng! But when I think about it the wifi does have advantages - images beamed straight onto your computer without the pfaff of uploading. But controlling the camera from a mobile device I don't get? GB?
Just found this comparison between the two which I thought was interesting enough to share: http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/canon-6d-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii/
@happysnap errr you really want to think about "images beaming straight to your computer" bit :)
You wont want to do that with RAW, its jut too big to transfer 20MB images. So that means you'd have to have RAW + small jpg and only send the small jpg - but then why would you want small jpg images on your computer? realistically you want to have the RAW ones right?
My 5D3 setup would do the same thing... only that it sends it to your iPad which means you're truly mobile
@toast Yeah, you are totally right Weng. Didn't think that one through. It is of no particular interest to me anyhow - I was just trying to think why it would appeal to GB.
@gazbadger PS really worth watching the video on that link i posted above, even though he talks quite a lot about video, there is great info on stills too.
@toast@happysnap Haha... I would imagine that for most uses this would be a redundant addition but it interested me in terms of the astrophotography that I enjoy doing and will be even more inclined to do with a full frame camera and it's better high ISO handling. Often setting up on a low tripod involves kneeling in cold mud and bending in an awkward position whilst trying to tweak settings and focus manually. Also there is built in intervalometer settings in the app which will help me with star trails shots. These are the aspects of that feature that appeal to me... whether they make up for the lack of weatherproofing and AF system present in the 5d3 I haven't decided yet but it's definitely a plus for me =)
@gazbadger ok, i can see where that would help... although possibly marginally. From what i understand of astrophotography, its pretty much a focus once, turn off AF, and just shoot the sh*t out of it since your focus point really doesnt change appreciably much relative to our position?
@gazbadger actually, kinda similar but not quite, I did look at both 5D3 and 6D a while ago thinking i wanted to do the northern lights in the freezing cold and wondered which would be better.
The 6D seemed to win out on this one being 1 stop more sensitive to light, but then I thought if its that dark, i'm not really going to hand hold this sucker and would just use a tripod and manual focus anyway.
Interesting note - when you look at the operating temperature, they both say 0C - 40C on the canon site. Now, i'm sure that they can operate under this, its just what the web site says
@toast Lol... my tripod will work higher but I like to get a low PoV to take in some landscape silhouettes but still be shooting straight up.
Most computers state that they won't operate in temps lower than 5 degrees C but I have seen them work in some extremely low temps although can become unpredictable. I expect it's the same for cameras... the manufacturers are just covering themselves... if someone has trouble using it at -10 then Canon will just wash their hands of liability.
@gazbadger@toast@abirkill
Well, I have taken on board all your thoughts and input, done further research on the Internet myself and been to the shop today to take a look at the 5D MarkIII and the 6D - tried them both out (just in the store) and finally came to my conclusion. The 6D is the one for me! In my opinion and for my preferences it is impossible to justify the ca. CHF 1000 difference for the few "little" extras e.g. two card slots, slightly faster frame rate and auto focus, number of focus points etc. I am stepping up from the old, original 5D and I am sure I will be very happy with the difference from that to what the 6D offers. One other deciding factor was that the 6D actually sits better in my hands - the grip fits perfectly to my hand size, where as the grip of the 5DIII felt really bulky and too chunky in comparison. I am sure (and could see with the sales man) that the grip of the 5D III fits better to a man's hand. The 6D is also a little lighter (ca 200gr) and as I am now considering a heavy zoom to go with it (knew that would happen) I am happy to save on weight where I can.
Many thanks for all your very valuable input - it really has been so helpful!
Good luck GB with your decision making process and do let me know what you finally decide on.
@kass I see you went from a 7D I was thinking about getting 7D or a 5D ii as both about the same price 7D new - 5D used. To be honest I could afford the Mk 3 but I always beat myself up when I come to spen money on myself - maybe I should just give in and treat ME for a change?
@happysnap Thanks Linda... you will have to keep me posted after you have been using the 6d for a while and let me know how you're getting on with it... I expect you can't put it down at the minute can you? =)
I haven't actually picked it up yet, but will do in the next couple of days. I want to sleep on the lens subject and decide whether or not I will buy both at the same time or not. Yeah, I will let you know when I have got it and used it. So happy to have at least made the camera decision!
@toast Thank you Weng. I am very excited about the new camera.
I currently have a 50mm f1.4, a 24-70mm f2.8 and a Sigma 105mm Macro.
I do mostly studio portraits at the moment (I have a small studio) - families, kids, business portraits and dogs. I am just about to embark on a wedding photography master class (hopefully a one to one 5 day training session - I am in the process of sorting it) and I am looking to get a 70-200mm or 70-300mm lens. I know everyone absolutely raves about the 70-200mm f2.8 but I really have an issue with the weight (not to mention the price). So I am considering the 70-200mm f4. I tried the 70-300mm on the 6D yesterday in the shop and it felt doable and appealing. But I do want to avoid as much weight as I realistically can. I am also interested in the 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 DO VC USD but I can't seem to find anyone who can tell me much about it, let alone view it (need to talk to the retailer about it again). I really like its compact size but have absolutely no idea if it can live up to the full length version / L version. I am an extremely non technical person and I wade my way through all the technical stuff just because I have to, but I have to be careful not to be overwhelmed by science and blinded by purism.
Re the pricing - a bit of a dilemma in some ways. I can get the camera on line for at least $300 less than in a store (same with the lens = cheaper on line). But the thing is, if things go wrong it is a pain in the neck to have to deal with it yourself, where as with a retailer - they sort it and would give me a back up solution at a good price. Also the retailer I spoke to yesterday would give me a 3 year guarantee instead of two and throw in a couple of SD cards as well (his way of helping get the over all price down). So I am thinking it is probably best to pay a bit more and get the service in my case. It is not common here to purchase in the way you mentioned - over a period of time - it is up front on nothing I'm afraid! Ouch.
Hmm, as exciting as it is to buy new equipment I really don't like all the decision making and comparing. Once I have my kit I also don't go checking out the latest updates, I concentrate on using it and enjoying the creative side. But that means when I do need to upgrade or buy a new piece I have to start from scratch finding out about everything. Any thoughts on the lenses?
ok personally i think the 24-70mm f2.8 will be your workhorse here.
For me, I think the 70-200mm f2.8 is king... i wouldnt consider any other lens in that range. EDIT : thats just my preference here
I shoot at 2.8 alot because I prefer the DoF especially for portraits on location and candids. I wouldn't ever consider the f4 for this reason - the glass is supposed to be good, but I just cant stop down low enough. Also keep in mind that if you're shooting weddings, you're going to want that extra stop of light for dark places. My answer for the weight... go to the gym and get bigger arms :)
The information i've heard from some wedding photographers is that they want the speedy service of warranty - which means that going back to the store actually may add more time as they will send to canon.
Correct me if i'm wrong but that extended warranty is actually a third party warranty and not via canon? You may want to investigate that since my research of them here in the UK is "its not worth the paper its printed on".
As for payment up front vs finance options, my friend gave me an additional option - you create your own "LOAN".
*** Please note, I dont like this idea but there doesnt seem anything wrong with it if you pay it off religiously and dont spend extra. Essentially how it works. Buy the camera + lens or whatever. then get a balance transfer - here in the UK we have balance transfers at 0% interest for maybe 18 months, but lets say a 1% admin fee. So if we're talking a 3k camera, you pay $54 on admin. so that becomes a total of 3054. You think of this as a loan instead and dont use that card for anything else but just pay it off over 18 months... thats about $170 a month. Like i said, it all falls down if you start using that card to buy more stuff :)
Ha ha Weng - go to the gym! Do you seriously think I have enough money left for a gym subscription!? ;-) Or time ! - with all the researching and workshops? No seriously, I think light wise the f4 shouldn't be a problem as ISO compensation should be just brilliant on the 6D. DOF on the other hand is a stronger argument for me. But never the less, I know I want to carry around as little weight as possible from past experience so I am going to look at the 70-200mm f4 and the 70-300mm f4-5.6 on Friday when I pick up the camera. I can also take both lenses out for a little while to try and get a feel for them.
Your workshop sounds amazing and in a what a location! Green with envy ;-)
I have been looking at something far tamer, in the UK actually - I spoke to the photographer today and we could tailor fit a 5 day fast track mentor course to cover all aspects that I want including 2 x 3 hour shoots with different wedding couples. I haven't decided 100% yet and am still looking around. http://www.pictureinspire.co.uk/home
It is the one to one tuition that really appeals to me, so that I can really concentrate on the areas I want / need to.
Warranty systems are very closely monitored here, so I have no worries about the 3rd year, but it is good point, thanks, I will double check to make sure.
I shoot the 7D and love it. I would like to move up to full frame at some point. The MKII won't serve me well since it's not fully compatible with my Canon 600 speed lights . They require a 2012 or newer body to realize the 600's full potential, high speed sync being one I'd use if I could.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
from what I hear, if you shoot alot of weddings, then yeah, its worth it. Alternatively, if your budget can withstand it, also go for it :)
I should add the caveat.. if you already have decent lenses...
I would love a mark 3 one day but love my 6d :)
hey if you have the resources go for it Linda
An extra $800 for more focus points (I usually only use one, center focus... so I find the 9 it does have more than enough) and fps (yes... this would be nice but not at $800 extra... besides that may be of more interest to "spray-and-pray" shooters)... I'd rather save the money. No doubt the Mark III is a fantastic frame, but just not fantastic enough to pull me from my Mark II.
As anyone who has followed me for any amount of time could attest, I've abused this camera beyond its intended limits! It's been submerged in water, snow and mud. It's been thrown, dropped, and dragged. It's taken a tumble into a fire and been left out in -20 degree weather for hours shooting star trails (two nights ago in fact). All without a hitch.
When this camera finally gives up the ghost, I will most likely get another Mark II; not only because of the savings, but because holy crap this guy is a proven workhorse!
On a side note, @mummarazzii :
The ISO for the 5DMKII is much higher than you think; here's a shot I just took for this discussion ;)
ISO 25,600, check exif for more info ;)
Folks who have the MKIII love it, I have no doubt! But if you have neither, I'd recommend the MKII. :)
If you're worried about second hand you could always go for a refurbed one from reputable place? The other point where the mk3 is good is it has lens corrections available which aparently make even mediocre lens perform well.
Personally, i've had issues with my Mk3 and had to send it back to canon twice now. Its been a real pain but I still love it. Plug the 85mm F1.4 on this and the results are amazing
One thing I am sure of - I will stay with the 5D - just a matter of which upgrade II or III:
@steampowered @grizzlysghost Thanks very much Aaron and Paul!
Here's the thing - I can appreciate the speed advantage, but Iike Aaron I am totally at a loss to why I need would need 61 focus points? I set my 5D (9 focus points) to centre, focus, frame, shoot. What would I be doing with all those extra focus points? But as Ron @kannafoot pointed out - "The number of focus points can be adjusted dynamically and quickly" - so perhaps I am just being a stuck in the mud shooter and need to learn the advantages of all those additional focus points and how to use them!? My research showed the following advantages - focus points, speed, HDR mode (I wouldn't shoot HDR via the automatic setting anyhow), better video capabilities/capacity (not particularly interested in video). The thing that is making me doubt whether I should go for the MarkII over the MarkIII is mostly the age of the technology thing to be honest. One thing I am convinced of is the leap from 5D to 5D Mark II is a big one (advantage wise) and now I need to decide if I can/need to justify the leap from 5D II to 5D III. As a non- techie I am finding it very hard to make the decision…
All those that have gone for the 5D MarkIII love it , which is great to hear, but then so far no one has said that they also know the MarkII (as in, have used both).
Decisions, decisions...
As I said to Katie above - my 5D is over 8 years old and has been used a lot. I would keep it as a back up. The thing I really dislike about the 5D is how it struggles in low light and in high contrast shots (LOTS of noise in dark areas). The 5D really served me well but it is definitely time to move on.
some yourself the sigma 85mm f1.4 or even the canon 70-200mm f2.8 and you'll be in love
Pretty much the only things to recommend the 5D Mark II are that it can shoot at 1/8000th rather than 1/4000th, it can sync at a slightly higher speed when shooting with flashes, and it takes CF cards rather than SD cards (which is only a benefit because that's what you already have).
The naming of these cameras is really a bit misplaced -- the 6D should be seen as the replacement for the 5D Mark II, whereas the 5D Mark III should be seen as an entirely new camera range. The 5D Mark III moves the 5D from a landscape/portrait camera to a general-purpose full-frame camera, putting in almost the same autofocus system that the 1DX has, and increasing the framerate to 6 frames per second. This means that you can use the 5D3 not only for landscape and portrait work, but for sports, action and wildlife photography.
If you want a straight replacement for your 5DC that will do the same things but much better, and you don't care about sports/wildlife, get the 6D. If you find the autofocus and/or framerate on your 5DC limiting, then consider the 5D3. It's almost impossible to find a case where the 5D2 would be the correct choice over those two, an awesome camera as it is.
Your statement here really sums it up:
'The thing I really dislike about the 5D is how it struggles in low light and in high contrast shots (LOTS of noise in dark areas).'
The simple answer to this is that your new camera should be the 6D. The 6D both focuses slightly better in low light and produces slightly lower noise photos at high ISOs than the 5D Mark III, and will wipe the floor with the 5D Mark II.
@grizzlysghost I take it from your winky face you know this already ;), but the 5D2 is limited to a native ISO of 6400 -- this is the highest ISO the sensor can work at. H1 and H2 (which will appear as 12800 and 25600 in the EXIF) are taken at ISO 6400 and then boosted artificially by one or two stops. You can get the same (typically better) results as H2 mode if you shoot in raw by shooting at ISO 6400 with two stops of underexposure and then boost the exposure in your raw processor (this also allows you to better prevent blown highlights). H1 and H2 are useful if you shoot in JPEG.
The 6D and 5D3 provide a native ISO setting of up to 25600, with the boosted H1 and H2 settings providing a software-boosted 51200 and 102400 ISO.
You mention issues with noise and low light performance (I also had issues with both with my 7D). The 6D will easily win you over with its performance - instant focusing in low light and well controlled noise. It's also lighter and smaller than the 5DMark cameras - something I also wanted since I carry the camera around quite a bit. I purchased the 6D right before my landscape course last September and was very happy with the results.
Though, I still use my 7D for faster subjects (8 fps) over the 6D (4.5 fps). Something to consider if you shoot lots of action/sports.
Here are some comparisons:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/6d/vs-5d-mark-iii.htm
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d
Thank you so much Alexis and Kass - I really hadn't considered the 6D at all (tending to be a creature of habit and stick with what I know kinda girl) but you have really opened my eyes. I will definitely go to a store and check out both the 6D and the 5D III now. I would use my new camera mostly for portrait and event work. Sports / action photography is not of particular interest to me.
I know four friends with 5D2s, advised all of them not to bother upgrading to the 5D3, which they all agreed with until they saw and played with my 5D3, and three of the four have now upgraded!
Interestingly, in all cases it wasn't the improvement in image quality (which is, in the scheme of things, not that huge) that convinced them, as they already knew about that. It was all the little extra features like the ability to do up to 7 bracketed shots, dual memory card slots, the built-in level, the more sensitive live view, etc. that persuaded them. Canon have done a nice job with the 5D3 and 6D of adding on lots of little features that add up to make it nicer to use, even though they rarely have a direct impact on the final image.
Might be worth a look as this would save you about $1600 which could go towards a lens budget.
I believe that B&H offers a warranty on their used items.
My conclusion regards my own dilemma is that we are all completely bonkers and allow ourselves to get way too carried away... does this mean that I don't want to upgrade to the 5d mk3? No... but after reading this thread I have looked again at the 6d and I am edging towards that one now for purely financial reasons.... Can I live without a 61 point AF system and 2 memory card slots?.... for the difference in price, probably.... would I still like to have them? Who wouldn't?
Side by side though on paper the 6d does seem to outdo the 5d mk2 on a few things though but there are obviously people here who love theirs and I have never used either so can't say either way.
After all that rambling... I am still undecided and will probably remain so until I eventually just put my hand in my pocket and flip a coin. Let me know which one you decide to come down on and how it works out for you =)
I think one of the deciding factors for me will also probably be when I have held the two in my hands and had a look at them 'live' as well as all the stats. Yeah, sure, I'll let you know how I decide. You do the same and we can compare notes.
However it is great fun to have new gear and a joy to use some of these incredible cameras and all the bells and whistles!
Also, the performance of the 6D was still an unknown factor, with no reviews of production units available. The general expectation was that the 6D wouldn't perform amazingly well, being on par or worse than the 5D Mark II, but it turned out to be pretty much on a par with the 5D Mark III for image quality (and indeed, slightly better at high ISOs)
For the $600 difference in price, the higher framerate and awesome autofocus system on the 5D3 made it, for me, the better choice. I'm extremely picky about image sharpness, and was constantly frustrated with the autofocus performance on my previous Canon crop-frame cameras, so the chance to get the best autofocus system ever made by Canon was, while overkill, a tempting proposition (and one I've not been disappointed in). I was spending $6000 including lenses, and the 10% extra over the unknown quantity of the 6D (at that time) was a pretty easy choice to make.
I absolutely don't regret purchasing the 5D3 as it's a stunning camera, but if you don't absolutely need the framerate and autofocus benefits, the current very competitive price of the 6D (at least in the US) makes it very hard to justify spending the considerable extra cash to get the 5D3 today.
I highly respect your opinion and you always offer and share your expertise so readily - thank you!
@gazbadger I am sure Alexis' input above will interest you too.
I think for me I should have gotten the 5D3 in the first place, stuck with my 24-105L and got a couple of primes and then later gotten the 24-70L or the 70-200L
What i usually do is save RAW to CF and small jpg to the SD. The SD is actually an eye FI card which saves the images as small jpg and then sends them to my iPad as I shoot. May sound like a bit of overkill, but when i'm on photo shoots, it really does help seeing the image on a bigger screen when you're out an about. I know a 6D can probably do the same (i think?) but then you'd be saving both RAW + jpg on the same card.
I am hoping I will "know" which is the right option for me when I have seen both "live" - what's the betting it is the more expensive of the two!! ha ha
I think I am going to have to go down to my local camera shop and spend some time handling them both.
When I sat down and wondered about it, i assumed that controlling via wireless device means that i'd set up my camera somewhere to take pics and i wouldnt be there. Then I realised that I didnt want a camera that expesnive out in the open without me being there :D
Just found this comparison between the two which I thought was interesting enough to share: http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/canon-6d-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii/
You wont want to do that with RAW, its jut too big to transfer 20MB images. So that means you'd have to have RAW + small jpg and only send the small jpg - but then why would you want small jpg images on your computer? realistically you want to have the RAW ones right?
My 5D3 setup would do the same thing... only that it sends it to your iPad which means you're truly mobile
As for kneeling... get a taller tripod? :P
The 6D seemed to win out on this one being 1 stop more sensitive to light, but then I thought if its that dark, i'm not really going to hand hold this sucker and would just use a tripod and manual focus anyway.
Interesting note - when you look at the operating temperature, they both say 0C - 40C on the canon site. Now, i'm sure that they can operate under this, its just what the web site says
Most computers state that they won't operate in temps lower than 5 degrees C but I have seen them work in some extremely low temps although can become unpredictable. I expect it's the same for cameras... the manufacturers are just covering themselves... if someone has trouble using it at -10 then Canon will just wash their hands of liability.
Also, the battery life would not be as good in low temps
Well, I have taken on board all your thoughts and input, done further research on the Internet myself and been to the shop today to take a look at the 5D MarkIII and the 6D - tried them both out (just in the store) and finally came to my conclusion. The 6D is the one for me! In my opinion and for my preferences it is impossible to justify the ca. CHF 1000 difference for the few "little" extras e.g. two card slots, slightly faster frame rate and auto focus, number of focus points etc. I am stepping up from the old, original 5D and I am sure I will be very happy with the difference from that to what the 6D offers. One other deciding factor was that the 6D actually sits better in my hands - the grip fits perfectly to my hand size, where as the grip of the 5DIII felt really bulky and too chunky in comparison. I am sure (and could see with the sales man) that the grip of the 5D III fits better to a man's hand. The 6D is also a little lighter (ca 200gr) and as I am now considering a heavy zoom to go with it (knew that would happen) I am happy to save on weight where I can.
Many thanks for all your very valuable input - it really has been so helpful!
Good luck GB with your decision making process and do let me know what you finally decide on.
What lenses do you currently have?
What lens are you thinking of?
what will you use it for?
also, are you able to get the body and lens on a finance deal? Ie 20% up front and 0% for 10 months or something?
I currently have a 50mm f1.4, a 24-70mm f2.8 and a Sigma 105mm Macro.
I do mostly studio portraits at the moment (I have a small studio) - families, kids, business portraits and dogs. I am just about to embark on a wedding photography master class (hopefully a one to one 5 day training session - I am in the process of sorting it) and I am looking to get a 70-200mm or 70-300mm lens. I know everyone absolutely raves about the 70-200mm f2.8 but I really have an issue with the weight (not to mention the price). So I am considering the 70-200mm f4. I tried the 70-300mm on the 6D yesterday in the shop and it felt doable and appealing. But I do want to avoid as much weight as I realistically can. I am also interested in the 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 DO VC USD but I can't seem to find anyone who can tell me much about it, let alone view it (need to talk to the retailer about it again). I really like its compact size but have absolutely no idea if it can live up to the full length version / L version. I am an extremely non technical person and I wade my way through all the technical stuff just because I have to, but I have to be careful not to be overwhelmed by science and blinded by purism.
Re the pricing - a bit of a dilemma in some ways. I can get the camera on line for at least $300 less than in a store (same with the lens = cheaper on line). But the thing is, if things go wrong it is a pain in the neck to have to deal with it yourself, where as with a retailer - they sort it and would give me a back up solution at a good price. Also the retailer I spoke to yesterday would give me a 3 year guarantee instead of two and throw in a couple of SD cards as well (his way of helping get the over all price down). So I am thinking it is probably best to pay a bit more and get the service in my case. It is not common here to purchase in the way you mentioned - over a period of time - it is up front on nothing I'm afraid! Ouch.
Hmm, as exciting as it is to buy new equipment I really don't like all the decision making and comparing. Once I have my kit I also don't go checking out the latest updates, I concentrate on using it and enjoying the creative side. But that means when I do need to upgrade or buy a new piece I have to start from scratch finding out about everything. Any thoughts on the lenses?
For me, I think the 70-200mm f2.8 is king... i wouldnt consider any other lens in that range. EDIT : thats just my preference here
I shoot at 2.8 alot because I prefer the DoF especially for portraits on location and candids. I wouldn't ever consider the f4 for this reason - the glass is supposed to be good, but I just cant stop down low enough. Also keep in mind that if you're shooting weddings, you're going to want that extra stop of light for dark places. My answer for the weight... go to the gym and get bigger arms :)
The information i've heard from some wedding photographers is that they want the speedy service of warranty - which means that going back to the store actually may add more time as they will send to canon.
Correct me if i'm wrong but that extended warranty is actually a third party warranty and not via canon? You may want to investigate that since my research of them here in the UK is "its not worth the paper its printed on".
As for payment up front vs finance options, my friend gave me an additional option - you create your own "LOAN".
*** Please note, I dont like this idea but there doesnt seem anything wrong with it if you pay it off religiously and dont spend extra. Essentially how it works. Buy the camera + lens or whatever. then get a balance transfer - here in the UK we have balance transfers at 0% interest for maybe 18 months, but lets say a 1% admin fee. So if we're talking a 3k camera, you pay $54 on admin. so that becomes a total of 3054. You think of this as a loan instead and dont use that card for anything else but just pay it off over 18 months... thats about $170 a month. Like i said, it all falls down if you start using that card to buy more stuff :)
As for wedding training, who are you going with?
I'll be flying to Nassau end of may to attend the Fstoppers workshop and Pye Jirsa's wedding workshop
http://fstoppersworkshops.com/event-registration/?ee=18
Your workshop sounds amazing and in a what a location! Green with envy ;-)
I have been looking at something far tamer, in the UK actually - I spoke to the photographer today and we could tailor fit a 5 day fast track mentor course to cover all aspects that I want including 2 x 3 hour shoots with different wedding couples. I haven't decided 100% yet and am still looking around. http://www.pictureinspire.co.uk/home
It is the one to one tuition that really appeals to me, so that I can really concentrate on the areas I want / need to.
Warranty systems are very closely monitored here, so I have no worries about the 3rd year, but it is good point, thanks, I will double check to make sure.