Canon 5D MII prices dropping

[D.P.]

I would imagine the MP count of the next 5D to be higher of that currently available for the 5DII
But I don't see the 5DII going anywhere either. AF aside its got a huge place in the industry still with little coming close to it.

Apart from Canon 1DsMkIII, 1Dx (5DMKII) and Nikon D700, D800,D3/s, D3x, D4, Sony A900, A850 etc., etc. Which all offer FF performance sensors AND additionally provide pro AF/metering/body and the newer Nikon and Canons offering superior video performance (in particular the Nikon D800 and D4 allow raw uncompressed output over HDMI).

The 5DMKII is only unique in that it puts a high-end sensor in a low-end body, while everyone else puts a high-end sensor in a high-end body. This worked fine for Canon last time round. For studio/landscape/macro/ the 5DMKII may have a place but these areas will as well if not better be served by the alternatives and new cameras.


That doesn't mean the 5DMKII might not continue to be sold. Who knows what is in the stockpile or what Canon's plans are.

 

[mr tommo]

The AF system in the 5D was basic and already a little dated/old tech for a full frame camera high-end camera but no one really care because this was the first offering of a full frame camera at somewhat sane prices.
It was never really updated for 5DMKII in a sufficient way, so now it is really archaic relative to what the competitors can offer for the same money (Nikon D700, Sony A900/A850).

But the AF is just one area where the 5DMKII really lags behind its competitors, build quality, water proofing, metering, ergonomics, etc.


I have used the 5DMKII about 4 or 5 times for 15-20 minutes at a time in various light conditions. In normal daylight for static subjects i have no issues at all. For tracking fast subjects or when used inside such as church I really notice it lagging and I actually prefer to use my Nikon D90, more reliable focusing and often faster.

Some people claim using the center point works well. Well, that's fine if you want your subject slap bang in the center of the frame, in which case you should be using a point and shoot. You can focus and recompose but that is a really bad idea on a full frame camera if your are shooting some fast glass wide open (hint, your subject will no longer be focus). That is a technique that was used 25 years ago on the earliest film AF camera when they only came with a few points, it has no place for a high end camera this side of the year Y2K.

So which method do you use to shoot an off centre subject? Do you use the af-on option and use the joystick to determine the focus point?

 

[An Exception]

I would imagine the MP count of the next 5D to be higher of that currently available for the 5DII

Yes I think your right, as going by the latest rumours, apparently it will have 22mp.

 

[D.P.]

So which method do you use to shoot an off centre subject? Do you use the af-on option and use the joystick to determine the focus point?

I shoot with a Nikon d90 and use the arrow buttons to select the focal point closest to my intended subject. Depending on the aperture and focal length I may do a small amount of recomposing or post-crop, or even use live view or manual focus.

A big reason for me to upgrade cameras is to simply have a wider coverage of focus points.

It should be noted the problems only arise with shallow DoF. It is also important to note the focal problem is highly non-linear and is dependent on the lens construction, focal length, focal distance and aperture.

 

[bigredshark]

I've got no interest in the high MP D800, it's quite interesting how many Nikon users aren't happy that there isn't a more direct replacement for the D700. Plenty of people would like to see lower MP and increased high ISO performance. I sincerely hope the 5D2 replacement isn't a high MP model, neither Canon or Nikon would be getting any of my money!

Quite, I've contemplated Canon in the past, primarily because there's a better choice of glass that I want which is (generally) a little cheaper too. I've held off because of the shortcomings of the 5DII - that's not to say it's a bad camera, but I'm used to Nikon and I'd miss the AF, higher FPS, more serious weatherproofing too much.

*If* the 5DIII is as rumored and 22MP with 6-7FPS and 61 point AF with D700 level ISO performance then I will probably move to Canon. The D800 is a nice camera but it's FPS is too low for me and it's not enough of an all rounder. And if I want both 24 f/1.4 and 35 f/1.4 I'll save a lot of money with Canon rather than Nikon.

 

[D.P.]

Funny that people are saying the D800 will have worse high ISO performance than the D700, which is simply not going to be the case. At the worst you will have to down-sample somewhat but the D800 is probably overall at least 1-1.5 stops better than a D700 at high ISO at equivalent resolutions, and probably equal or better at 36MP. Just by enlarging a D7K sensor that has similar pixel pitch you will get this kind of result, the D800 sensor is a generation newer than that so couple be another 0.5-1 stop again.
The speed difference is also fairly minimal, 4FPS vs 5FPS is not game changing.

The D800 is a D4x with D4 internals and focusing going for 1/3rd of the price of what a D4x would presumably going by the D3x history. The D4 internals makes it an all rounder to me, just with the added post-processing step to downsample if you shoot RAW and care more about noise than resolution. Even the downsampling is not really required, even if pixel level noise is higher if you print the image to equal sizes there will be an automatic downsizing with the high-res images.

I would have preferred something in the 16-18MP range but it is not a deal breaker, pending some real world testing and results at 18MP.
EDIT: what is making me interesting in the high-res sensor beyond my landscape work is the options for wildlife. The D800 can put a lot of pixels on a bear using less exotic lenses. Of course I would prefer a D4 and 600mm f/4, but a D800 with a 300mm f/4 will produce a higher resolution crop of the animal and works out massively cheaper. Then if you consider putting something like a 300mm f/2.8 lens on a D800 it is still massively cheaper than a D4 + 600mm, much more portable, will put more pixels on the animal and allows an entire stop more light through, and the 300mm 2.8 should have sufficient resolving power being one of the sharpest lenses money can buy.

This was the reason I never purchased a D700 because I would face problems shooting wildlife, which I am enjoying more and more, unless I purchased some much bigger lenses. Hence I stayed on a DX camera for so long. The D800 changes that completely. The D800 looks like a great landscape + wildlife combo.

 

[D.P.]

Yes I think your right, as going by the latest rumours, apparently it will have 22mp.

This just doesn't sit right with me, if the Canon 1DX is 18MP and is supposed to be very good at high ISO, then what is the 22MP sensor supposed to achieve. It wont have measurably more resolution, and there is no way Canon will make it have equal or better high ISO than the 1DX at the higher resolution.

We all know that they like to re-use sensor as often as possible to reduce research and manufacturing costs.
I could imagine the 5DMKII using the 18MP 1DX sensor, or a new high res 32MP which has been rumored a lot on the past, or I can imagine using a tweaked 5DMKII sensor. If the 5DMKII was to be released 1-2 years after the 1DX then I could also imagine it using a 22MP sensor that has better high ISO performance than the 1DX sensor.

I just don't understand the logic between a 1DX with a high ISO 18MP sensor and a 5DMKII with an unknown newly developed 22MP sensor.



Although the latest rumors are suggesting 22MP I am confident that either they are wrong and it is a typo, with the sensor being a tweaked 21MP sensor form 5DMKII or 32MP and not 22MP , or the 5DMKII is a very different camera to what everyone is expecting (perhaps a crop camera, perhaps video focused, perhaps something unknown to me).

There may also be the case of having 2 new entry level full frame cameras, one using the old 21MP sensor but with new AF/metering/internals, another using a new 32MP sensor also with all the new AF/metering/internals. Actually thinking about I am very sure Canon will have 2 cameras to replace the 5DMKII, 1 high res, 1 low res. Strong rumors there will be a similar setup for Nikon with a D800 type camera with the 16MP D4 sensor. Canon will have to have higher resolution FF cameras, such cameras are interesting to landscape and studio togs, and such applications don't out right need tank like build quality of a 1 series.

 

[bigredshark]

Funny that people are saying the D800 will have worse high ISO performance than the D700

To be clear, I wasn't saying that, I was merely saying if the 5DIII matched D700 levels of high ISO performance that would be good enough for me.

The speed difference is also fairly minimal, 4FPS vs 5FPS is not game changing..

8 with the grip, I've found 5 to be about the minimum for shooting some sequences. I don't actually use it a lot and I'm not generally a fan of the burst mode but when I do want it I think that's about the minimum I'd like to have.

Again, not criticising the D800 so much as saying it's a very different camera from it's predecessor and it's not for me...

 

[Rojin]

The D800 is awesome, it's just not quite what I'm after. It'll make a lot of people happy I'm sure.

 

[D.P.]

To be clear, I wasn't saying that, I was merely saying if the 5DIII matched D700 levels of high ISO performance that would be good enough for me.




8 with the grip, I've found 5 to be about the minimum for shooting some sequences. I don't actually use it a lot and I'm not generally a fan of the burst mode but when I do want it I think that's about the minimum I'd like to have.

Again, not criticizing the D800 so much as saying it's a very different camera from it's predecessor and it's not for me...

I don't think the D800 is that different to the D700 though. The D700 was a D3 in a in smaller body and a little slower. The D800 is a D4 in a smaller body, slower, but with a "D4x" sensor. Yes, the D700 could do 8MPs with the grip + the D3 batteries , which is an important point, the grip alone did not achieve that. If speed was an important aspect then most people would have just purchased the D3. The D700 + grip + D3 batteries + new battery charger was not significantly cheaper than a D3 for most professionals to consider the D700 as a substitute. No doubt Nikon's plan after all to differentiate and maintain D3 sales.

The D800 just reinforces the point that if you want the fastest FPS then you need to buy the camera aimed at that market segment.


I understand where you are coming from but I don't really see the changes in the D800 as being so significant to change its core market.
As an aside, the D800 in DX mode will give 6FPS still giving plenty of resolution at 16MP. Applications that need high FPS, i.e. sport, will typically be happy running in Dx mode.


Personally I don't shoot ay sport so 1FPS is fine for me.

 

[An Exception]

+1

 

[julianhj]

I'm hanging on to see if it's worth getting a 5D2 or 5D3. I don't really want to spend more than £1500, but if the 5D3 comes in somewhere close then I'll give it some serious thought. I'd much rather have a new body than go s/h, give the comparatively small cost difference. Either way it'll be a big step up from my 40D.

 

[bigredshark]

The D800 just reinforces the point that if you want the fastest FPS then you need to buy the camera aimed at that market segment.

Well, That might be true and might be Nikon's intention but that's basically what I don't like about it. I don't want a D4 unfortunately, it's too much weight, too much money, too many features I don't need.

I don't actually want the 'fastest' or 'best', I just want better than what is on offer. I've no interest in 12FPS but I would like better than 4 please.

I just want a full frame all rounder, which I don't think the D800 is, I want a D700 with video at the end of the day, or a 5DII with D700 quality AF and FPS, either will do. Maybe that'll turn up as a different model in a few months but right now the 5DIII as rumoured matches that need better than the D800.

And once again, that's not me saying the D800 isn't a great bit of kit, it is fantastic, however, as a big fan of the D700 I'm not a fan of the D800. They have inevitably made compromises (of course, it's a mid range camera) and the ones they've chosen don't work for me. They'll work really well for people who liked the 5DII I suspect and for a lot of other people (Landscape, portrait, wedding photographers will surely love it as a start).

 

[Rojin]

It's not seeing a great deal of love from wedding photographers, again it comes down to the 36MP. A lot just don't need it. It impacts their workflow for no perceived benefit. The sooner the camera is out there the better, it'll be good to see it in real use.

After having a 7D the high density sensor does impact hand holding technique as well. You'll be wanting to up that shutter speed for sharpness or shell out for stabilised lenses. Which is probably just what the manufacturers want!

 

[An Exception]

^^^
While I don't need 36mp and it will surely put pressure on my PC, I'm actually really looking forward to the D800.
The -2EV AF will come in very handy for me (could ditch AF assist in anything but extremely low light), the metering also sounds very good.
As for shutter speed, you don't need to increase it over the D700, unless you want to capture more detail than the D700's 12mp's...

 

[Rojin]

Not in my experience, both the 40D and 1D3 I could shoot at slower shutter speeds than the 7D and obtain sharper output than the 7D even when resized. The softer shot is even noticeable at 1024 web size. You can use sharpening to compensate but unless you have the time for multiple layers and masks it's going to be noticeable.

If the D800 had higher fps with the grip and sraw, I'd probably be listing all my gear for sale now

 

[An Exception]

^^^
7D isn't the sharpest of camera's regardless of pixel density, the 550D is sharper at pixel level supposedly due to a weaker high-pass filter, I'v also seen samples of a 500D being sharper than the 7D even when up-scaled to 7D res.
The AA filter isn't the only thing that causes softness though, as problem with 'most' crops, is that Nikon and Canon apply noise reduction in the firmware that you can't turn off (I presume this is just to score high in DXO mark etc). That's why crops look blurry at higher ISO's but (most) FF's just show more noise yet remain sharp.

 

[Rojin]

Until the D800 FF pixel density has been relatively low, I'm not talking about sharpness at all but motion induced blur. Ignoring the 7D, D7000 users also find higher shutter speeds are required for sharper shots. How did you find yours?

 

[An Exception]

^^^
D7000 was fine and I shot it the same way as my D700. If possible (which is 90% of the time) I don't go below 1/160 all the way from 85mm and below, so I can wiz around and take allot of photo's quickly in a short space of time and not have to pause and consciously keep the camera as still as possible, but I pay the price in ISO, which I happily do as it aids my shooting.

I understand your talking about motion blur, but what I was getting at, is it's not ideal to compare camera's of different pixel level sharpness, as that will skew the results when viewing at pixel level.

I have no doubt however that the D7000 needs a higher shutter speed to avoid movement being recorded on more than 1 pixel. But when both view at the same size, they should be of equal quality.

Also the difference in shutter speed needed to 'freeze' motion isn't that much.

For example, if it takes a 12mp D700 1/100 shutter speed to only record motion in one pixel, a 21mp 5Dii would need 1/130 to avoid blur at the pixel level, a 36mp D800 would need 1/170 to avoid blur and thus be able to use all those megapixels.

As those shutter speed are not selectable, the below shutter speed would be used in the real world if blurring needed to be completely avoided.
D700 1/100
5Dii 1/160
D800 1/200

So as a rough rule of thumb, the D800 requires a shutter speed 2x faster than the D700 to avoid or to get the same amount of blur at pixel level. However is you used the same shutter speed as a D700 and downscaled the image to 12mp, then neither image should show blur.

 

[Rojin]

I don't pixel peep, I'm only interested in the final output medium and the motion blur doesn't disappear during the resize. I've never seen this to be the case so remain to be convinced the D800 will be any different. I know we're not talking about huge differences in shutter speed but in your example it still shows a doubling in ISO. Of course if the D800 is good in that regard then it doesn't potentially matter. Come on Nikon just get the thing out there so we can see what it does in real terms!