The question of whether to buy a full-frame format or APS-C or H, everyone must decide for themselves. I shoot mainly portraits, fashion, street, travel and architecture. Sport and animals in the wild, etc. where you have very fast and / or distant objects, with me are the exception. Therefore I decided years ago for the full format and the 5D series.
After 2 weeks of intensive tests with the 5D Mark II, here's my review and some comparisons to classic 5D:
Housing:
After unpacking already came the first positive impression of the Gehäusehaptik. The camera feels stable and grippy as its predecessor. It is probably due to wertigeren marks on the magnesium case. The rotating wheels have more resistance and snap rich. Well to ensure an increase in quality measure to the new moisture protection. The CF card cover is still plastic, but you engage better and completes seamless. The control buttons have been changed only slightly in their position and function. So there is now the display illumination button next to the shutter release button (for me so logical to use) and the "Delete" button is now slipped as the lowermost button on the control buttons to the left of the display. (Attention all old 5D users! The Please is the position where the "image display" button was before. Get used quickly or are away pictures!)
The preview button has now moved laterally under the lens-locking. While this allows for better usability when shooting, but bothers me when operating the camera in the "Live View" mode, because it is easy to accidentally press the key. Here I have to get used to yet another holding the camera.
Display:
In addition to the upper camera display (LCD), is now displayed on the finally the ISO value (and now also in the viewfinder display!) Was built the large and crisp 3 "screen. That alone would almost reason enough for the update . It is bright, sharp and reproduces colors very well. The automatic brightness control of the display at varying ambient light is also helpful. The menu structure is now divided into different folders and thus logical for me and faster to use. The number of settings is with the additional Features also grown.
Viewfinder:
In direct comparison to the 5D me the new viewfinder like better. I feel it as a bit bigger, brighter and better coverage of the image area. Especially when wearing glasses I am happy about this improvement, since the field of view is already restricted by the glasses anyway (distance from the viewfinder).
Autofocus and exposure metering:
Here, the 5D Mark II has not actually changed. The AF seems to be identical to the 5D. This is a frequently read criticism, as there was no improvement here. I would have been an improvement in the AF not averse (eg next to the Center to install the other measuring points as cross-type sensors), but in my field of application of the AF of the 5D has always been sufficient and accurate enough, since I mainly use the center sensor in my work , Here goes another way than Canon Nikon, the spendieren their professional AF also the high-quality amateur cameras. Canon refers rather then to another camera system, such as the professional 1D Mark III or the more favorable 50D with better AF and faster continuous shooting.
Canon has the new 5D but lentils donated micro correction. Herewith you can individually select the focus point of the lens adjusts (frontal or back focus adjustment). I have taken the time and adjusted my lenses. And especially in the high-speed lenses that only have a very narrow focus area at maximum aperture, I can achieve more accurate results! In addition also comes nor the Live View function that displays a test of focus sharpness very reliable.
The exposure appears to be identical to the old 5D. I find it just as accurately as I am used to in the Mark II. The white balance has, however, in my opinion, somewhat improved. Indoors I get a little more accurate values, but this is currently a feeling and not a scientific comparison.
Sensor Cleaning:
Finally in the new 5D! Very often I go get some specks of dust on the sensor when changing lenses. The one noticed only then, if the landscape or architectural photography (large aperture) looks at home on the screen. And the same dust grains to clone from 300 photos is very annoying. The 5D MK II has an automatic cleaning mechanism that shakes dust particles from the sensor such. I had been no visible dust spots more in my photos.
ISO:
The ISO possibilities are truly amazing today. The Mark II can 50-25600 exposing ISO. And a wide range of this area is also really useful. I try anyway, if possible and appropriate, to take pictures with ISO 100. Here is the contrast ratio and the post-processing potential is greatest. But really to ISO 1600 are still very, very good results (assuming correct exposure) achieved, which can be printed very large also. ISO 3200 I also still amazingly well and absolutely useful. Some A4 printouts prove it. From ISO 6400 you can already see a noticeable loss of quality. For 10 X 15 photos but still absolutely passable and preferable all times a blurred image. ISO 12800 and 25600 (as H1 and H2 on the camera called) are still better than having no picture and in small format still usable. But please do not expect miracles!
ISO 50 (L) is more for extremely bright or studio situations where you can not settle far enough down the flash, or if you require longer exposure times to produce motion blur and you do not have gray filter on hand.
Resolution:
21 Megapixel ... Actually, I'm not a friend of the pixel craze that has become customary in recent years as vermeindliches Qualitätsindiez for digital cameras. It comes but ultimately depends on how good the pixels can be displayed (color, contrast range, noise) and how well a lens can resolve these pixels without color and image distortions?
I really had at the jump from 12 to 21 Mpix worry because now 75% more pixels have to share space on the chip, without interfering with each other there. Fortunately, this concern was unfounded! The resolution, color reproduction and dynamic range inspire me with the 5D MK II. But, a full-frame camera needs good lenses, and a 21 Mpix camera takes excellent lenses to the fine detail really represent.
Unfortunately, many tend ambitious photographers to reach for the best cameras but then skimp on the lenses. A good lens has perhaps decades, a DSLR housing but sometimes only 3-5 years. A comparative test with a reasonable zoom lens was really frightening. Compared to the high-quality Canon 70-200 f / 4 L IS looked the other photos, as if someone had smeared Vaseline on the front lens. It need not always be Canon "L" lenses, but in zoom lenses you are already in good hands with the f / 4 L series of Canon, if you do not need the maximum light intensity (I am absolutely satisfied with this: 17-40 , 24-105 (much as "Always top" recommended travel and lens) and 70-200). But prime lenses without "L" make a very good impression (50mm f / 1.4, 85mm f / 1.8, 100mm f / 2.8 macro).
The leap from 12 to 21 Mpix means real that an image at 100% output size in comparison "only" has approximately 1/3 longer edge lengths. So an expression with 12 MPix of previously eg 100 X 66cm would then at 21 Mpix 150x100cm mean (depending on the dpi setting).
Image results:
The photo results convince me of the progress of the sensor and processor technology. The detail resolution (with good lenses) is amazing! And the processing latitude of RAW files clearly greater than that of the old 5D.
However, my result applies only to images that have been photographed in RAW mode. JPG convincing results not so much because just details are a bit muddy in dark areas (creates too much noise reduction?).
I can only recommend her photos always shoot in RAW. The files are larger but who buys an expensive and high-quality camera, which should not save in a format such as JPG Verlusstbehafteten its results.
And with a good photo software such as Apple Aperture and Adobe Lightroom 2 editing and managing digital RAW treasures has also become much easier.
Video:
Video is a feature that I find nice having my purchase but does not affect. It's virtually impossible even to have to carry a video camera in addition to the relatively heavy photographic equipment, but a normal video camera for spontaneous films on holiday or at family gatherings replaces the 5D II in my eyes. It starts with the unhandlicheren ergonomics for video recordings and continues control in the poor contrast autofocus continues. Although you can now with a full-frame sensor and the high-quality lenses cinematic turn very high-quality movies, but even manual focus to but sometimes a bit narrow geratenen focus rings of the lens is an act (thanks to the large sensor and fast lenses can be the sometimes very low much better affect depth of field than with compact video cameras, but therefore an accurate AF control is even more important, since otherwise only come out unfocused films. Because good is also the great HD resolution nothing). The built-in microphone transmits the sound of the IS (if available) and the zoom or focus adjustment and should definitely be supplemented by an external microphone.
But who wants to try a filmmaker himself, can with stand, external microphone and tidy manual focus exercise very presentable results achieved (see Canon Web site or video sharing sites).
Conclusion:
The 5D Mark II is the logical and consistent further development of the classic 5D. Higher speed, better display and viewfinder, and features a sensor cleaning or LiveView plus video mode round out the package. The resolution and color reproduction of images in RAW mode are simply outstanding, from today's point of view and in this price range with good lenses.
Canon remains loyal to its model policy and does not build everything technically feasible in the 5D MK II a. That remains the flagship of the 1Ds series reserved. But the 5D MK II is for even 70% cheaper than the 1Ds MK III. Depending on the purpose of the camera you may have to make small compromises in autofocus, or opt for the model that best meets the photographic main application.
These technological advances we must not forget the effect that it's still the photographer who makes good or less good pictures. The 5D MK II is not a panacea and is only in trained hands can also achieve superior results.
All in all, my review from my point of view and for my application for grades 1-
Pro:
+ Better housing
+ Better Finder
+ Much better display
+ Bessre menu control
+ Sensor Cleaning
+ AF micro-adjust the lenses
+ Live View
+ 3 Custom Function Memory
+ Very high resolution with good lenses
+ Color and contrast range in RAW files larger than the 5D
+ 1- 1.5 stops better ISO noise performance
+ Video option for professionals
Cons:
- AF not enhanced by further cross-type sensors
- AF in video mode is insufficient (Kontrastbasier because mirror is lifted up)
- Auto ISO insufficiently classifiable
- ISO sensitivity appear to be not entirely accurate. I suspect that ISO 200 is actually rather 150. That's a little window dressing. The old 5D was there closer to the real value.
PS I have no problems with the firmware 1:06 and could find no errors in the border area. An update to FW Version 1.07 I have therefore not yet been made.
![Gears of War: Judgment (uncut) - [Xbox 360] (Video Game)](https://img.tgreer.com/thumb/85x85/0/89/089a65f3bbdd5e781c1d6ea8d84bab7f.jpg)
