Albert's official Canon 5D review: You can save your money

[metalstorm]

Originally Posted by AlbertP

Had a chance to play around with the 5D for an entire day today. It was mine, right next to the 1D Mark II and the 1DS Mark II. My impressions, in a nutshell, coming from someone used to the 1-series bodies:

Albert, I see you actually bought it. May I ask why you bought one when you already had the 1DS2?

[metalstorm]

Albert,
Which one would you get in the under $4k range. The 1d2n or the 5d?. This is my quandary. The 12.8mp is enticing but not quite sure if I need it - would be nice.

[PJW]

Originally Posted by Paul

5. Image quality and dynamic range of the 5D is very good but not significantly improved over something like the 20D
6. ditto noise reduction at high ISO
7. A print up to something like an 8x12 wouldn't show any significant differences between a 5D and something like the 20D

Not quite. Since you would be downrezzing the 5D file more than the 20D file, the image clarity you lose with noise reduction for high ISO images will be greater with the 20D than with the 5D. In addition, you'll have to use less sharpening with the downrezzed 5D images than the downrezzed 20D images again because of the increase in sharpness you get just from downrezzing. The more you downrez, the sharper the final print, whether the unsharpness is from the len's aberations or misfocusing or the sensor or whatever. All of the factors that allow you to print 5D files larger with the same image quality result in better prints at the same final size. So the 5D wins.

[mikej]

Originally Posted by metalstorm

Mike,
I haven’t seen a 3MP output that has floored me like some of the 5D and 1ds2 full res images I’ve seen.

A lot of people that shoot large format cameras say the same thing about shots taken with less than a large format negative. Including from a 1Ds.

I've seen some pretty piss poor 1DsMKI and MKII shots and I've seen some pretty outstanding D30 shots. Maybe the difference will show up if you enlarge both to 20x30, but at smaller sizes, the D30 can still put out some excellent shots in the right hands... or very lucky hands. And of course the web is a great equalizer when it comes to how many mega pixels a camera has.

Mike

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by burningarrow

Albert, you say the 5D's tracking is better than the 20D's. How is it compared to the 1D?
Thanks.

I would say it's not quite as good, but the difference could also come down to frames per second. It's hard to tell. Honestly with the 1D and 1D Mark II I got out of focus shots sometimes while tracking, and I certainly do with the 5D.

I have to say, though, that the 5D locks and tracks impressively. I don't recall the actual tracking ability being any better with the 1D, which I have but didn't use side-by-side.

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by Kevin Barrett

Albert,

Thank you for your review and freely stating your first impressions. Actually, I find it rather refreshing that you've shared some of your annoyances. It appears, though that you've made a good purchase and will be using the camera a good deal. I've worked with the 5D in the store and rather like it as a whole. I looking forward to the day when it comes down considerably in price.

I agree that it's too expensive, but which digital slr today isn't? All of these cameras are way overpriced in my opinion. Seriously, in five years I doubt we'll be paying more for a great digital body than we do now for a great film body. That's the way it should be. Okay, maybe a few hundred dollars premium for the sensor, but otherwise these cameras are largely the same as what you have in film cameras.

I had no small body, which is why the 5D made sense for me. I think honestly everyone probably needs a smaller body. The big 1-bodies are just too heavy to carry around comfortably, even with the best fanny packs, which I have several of. I went on a long hike a couple of weeks ago with the 1-series in a fanny pack, and my back hurt me the entire next day.

The 5D's weight is a tad heavier than the 20D, it seems, and it's a tad larger. I know this because I put it yesterday in the smaller fanny pack I have, and the 20D glides in there easily. The 5D was snug but still fit. But the weight is entirely workable. I typically walk around with a body like that attached to the 85 1.8 or something else that's small and light. I probably need to repurchase the 24-85, which was light. I just didn't like the fact that it was f/3.5 at best. I need more light sucking when possible.

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by ohenry

Quick judgements are the least of my worries about being married to you, Albert!

Smart man.

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by Paul

So, after digesting the review on DPR, and Albert's more in depth analysis here, I draw the following points:

1. FF is good if you want to use your lens at the 'proper' focal length - wide-angle in particular benefits

Right.

2. Slightly shallower DOF is possible if shooting at a wide aperture

Right again.

3. If shooting wide open then you have to be careful of light fall-off/vignetting (which can possibly be fixed in post processing)

Here I disagree. I think it's mainly pixel peepers that are worrying about this stuff. I haven't noticed ANY light fallof when looking at pics, and I've used the camera with the 85 f/1.8, 135 f/2.0, 50mm f/2.5, 135 soft focus, and 28-135.

4. FF is not so useful if you're into telephoto work - the reduced pixel density compared to something like the 20D works against cropping

Well, maybe. The trouble is that your cropped sensor cameras don't offer the pixel density that your 1DS, 1DS Mark II, and 5D do, so you're looking at tradeoffs either way. The truly outstanding pics I've taken with the big guns have all been with the really high-pixel 1.0 cameras. Hate to say it. Detail matters.

5. Image quality and dynamic range of the 5D is very good but not significantly improved over something like the 20D

Disagree. Depends on your definition of "significantly improved." There's no question that 5D pictures have oodles more detail than 20D pics.

6. ditto noise reduction at high ISO

Maybe, but frankly I've never felt as comfortable shooting at high ISO as I am with this camera, once I saw how it handles high ISO.

7. A print up to something like an 8x12 wouldn't show any significant differences between a 5D and something like the 20D

Disagree. I can even tell the difference in detail between a measly 5x7 photo taken with a 1DS and one taken with a 20D. There's just more there, more wet, dripping, throbbing detail.

8. Lenses in general may need to be improved to make the most of the FF sensor

Pixel-peeper hogwash. My lenses work fine with the 1DS Mark II and the 5D. Plenty of sharpness. I don't think we've outpixeled our lenses by any means.

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by metalstorm

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s better than the 1ds2. Just that it’s output is very close for less than half the price.

The 1DS Mark II is the best digital camera I've ever owned or used. The colors on that cam just come out the way I wanted them to with the 1DS. The quality is outstanding, every time. I have a later serial number, so maybe Canon worked out some of the sharpness issues that early users were complaining of. My 1DS Mark II is deadly sharp.

The 5D's color I'm still not comfortable with. I've now taken to using the "faithful" picture style thingie, which is supposed to be more neutral than "neutral." (Canon, what's up with these stupid, confusing names?)

The 1DS Mark II will be with me for a long time, I think. I've pretty much decided to sell the 1DS.

[AlbertP]

Originally Posted by metalstorm

Albert, I see you actually bought it. May I ask why you bought one when you already had the 1DS2?

Yeah, at first I was embarrassed to say I bought it. I own too many frigging cameras. That's what happens when you're too old to know people with good weed connections, my friend. I'd much rather be sitting around saying "wow" at my toenails.