brianch
freelancer
Registered: May 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 213
|
|
Review Date: Tue April 21, 2009
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
large viewfinder, large bright LCD, good sized grip, lots of resolution, good high ISO performance, relatively solid body, all the bells and whistles of this generation of DSLRs, 1080P video recording
|
|
Cons:
|
not amazing autofocus, large file size, loud shutter, debatable build quality, slow operation and speed, no built in flash, no manual aperture control in video
|
|
I have owned quite a few Canon DSLRs and though this isn't the best one for me, it is quite a joy to use. Having owned the classic 5D, the 5D Mark II is a welcomed upgrade. For those who have never used a 35mm format camera the first thing you will realize when using the camera is how large and bright the viewfinder is. Just to touch on a few nice things about the 5D Mark II. I love the viewfinder just as much as the classic 5D. Actually I find the classic 5D to have a bit of a yellow tint to it, the 5D Mark II does not seem to have this problem. The new 920,000 dot 3" LCD screen is great. The new anti reflective coating is helpful in the sun and with the increase in resolution on the screen, checking focus and playback images are a joy. The form factor is pretty much the same as the classic 5D, which is not a bad thing. The 5D body is slightly larger then the 30D/40D bodies and also a bit heavier. There is no built in flash so the top is magnesium alloy (which is nice). The camera features a 21 million pixel CMOS sensor inherited from Canons (at the time) top of the line 1Ds Mark III. The sensor is similar to that of the 1Ds Mark III but there actually have been some improvements made to the sensor. Having played with a 1Ds mark III for some time before, I find the 5D Mark II files to be a little bit cleaner. One thing that many new users will complain about is how soft images might appear from the 5D, especially if you moved from a Rebel series camera. Canon intends for this to happen. Generally speaking the in camera sharpening of the higher end cameras are not as aggressive as the entry level ones. This is so the user can afterwards apply the desired level of sharpening to their photos. The sensor in the 5D is of the 35mm format, where as cameras like the Rebel series and 40D/50D are a cropped format. This just means the sensor is smaller on the Rebel and 40D/50D. In practice this means that a 50mm lens on the 5D will give you an equivalent view of 50mm, where on a 40D it would give you an equivalent view of 80mm. For ye old film users, 35mm will feel just like home. Now not all is great about this camera.. I do have a few complaints... My biggest complaint is the autofocus. This camera features a 9 point autofocus system. The center point is a cross sensitive point (super sensitive) with some assist points around it to help when tracking moving objects. The other 8 points are your standard AF points. Now the AF system works perfectly fine, you can still take photos with it. But considering its competitors (Nikon D700) the 5D Mark II seems to have an ancient AF system. And this does affect my style of shooting. I cannot rely heavily on the outter points as they may fail me. Relying on only the center point is not always fun. Even the 40D has a better AF system... It has 9 AF points... and all 9 are cross sensitive. As well the points on the 40D are spread out better then on the 5D.... On the 5D II all the points are jammed close to the center, which is not the best design.. but it still works. Another rant for me is the build quality. The build on the 5D mark II is a bit better then that of the 40D/50D cameras. Which is fine... But considering the 5D Mark IIs competitors (Nikon D700 and Sony A900) the 5D Mark II feels much cheaper. Most would consider the 5D mark II a professional camera, yet the build does not reflect that.. If you have ever held a Canon 1D or 1Ds body, then you will understand why I am complaining. I am not expecting 1D like build quality... But at least give me something in between. The build quality of a 1D Mark III and a 5D Mark II are very different. Another negative trait about the 5D Mark II (not a complaint for me though) is the speed of the camera.. The shutter blackout time and continuous shooting as well as autofocus speed is not anything to praise about. But you need to realize that this camera is aimed more at landscape, macro, and studio photographers. And speed is not absolutely essential in those kinds of photography. If speed is an issue for you (sports, wildlife, anything moving) then consider a 40D/50D or a 1D Mark III. Or if you want the best of both worlds, get a 1Ds Mark III =D. Another small complaint (but its really personal preference) is how loud the shutter is. Its cool sometimes, but other times its quite annoying. The shutter makes a loud CLA CLUNK sound when you press the shutter.. Either then that. I find the 5D II to be a very good value camera body. It offers professional image quality in a consumer body and consumer price. For me, this is basically the poor mans 1Ds Mark III. (O yea, and it is the first DSLR to record full HD 1080p video, though I don't use it often. Its still nice to have though. And the quality of the video is quite nice)
------------------------------
Brian C
|
|
Niknon Photography Discussion
