More like an advertisement than a review! But I guess that is fair enough, you have used it for a long time and a lot of frames so I assume you have good reason for such a glowing review.You haven't mentioned the 24-105/4L IS. In my mind this is what makes the 5D (or a cheaper FF camera a few years down the road) a worthy contender. After only 19 years of the EF mount, Canon finally decided to grace us with a quality standard zoom that doesn't break your back like the 24-70/2.8 does, woohoo! (now all it needs to do is come down in price and who needs IS anyway at these focal lengths if you can go to ISO 400 without any real loss of quality?)
I do think Nikon deserves more credit than you give them. The general rule seems to be to compare the 5D to the D200. In that respect all reviews show they are on par in image quality with the Nikon having the upper hand in build quality and price.
If you like your primes at their designed focal lengths and have cash to burn, the 5D seems like a good choice.
If you are a standard zoom junkie and no major current investment, a D200 and 17-55/2.8 might well be the ticket.
-- Bas Scheffers, February 27, 2006
Thanks for the article! One thing you didn't mention as an advantage over the 350D is that the viewfinder in the 5D has a much larger image. For me, that's the most compelling reason to buy the camera. After looking through a 5D my 350D viewfinder feels like a tiny dark tunnel.One correction; you say "you could pull out the central 8 MP of a 5D image and it would be almost as though you had taken the photo with a Canon 30D or Digital Rebel." I wish that were true, but it's not. The area of the 5D 35mm sensor is about 2.6 times the area of the 350D APS-C sensor, but there's only 1.5 times as many megapixels. Alas I only went to the MIT Media Lab so I can't do the math to tell you exactly how far you can crop a 5D picture and retain the same resolution, but there's not enough pixels to match the 350D's higher density sensor. I still agree that full frame sensors are better in every way, though.
For a single zoom lens, the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 makes an inexpensive and light alternative to Canon's 24-70L f/2.8. Mine takes great pictures.
-- Nelson Minar, February 27, 2006
If I read this review correctly I agree with Phil in regards to the cost and value of the 5D. I also agree that it is a consumer priced camera, but to me all purchases made by individuals are considered consumer purchases.Take for example when I purchased a Leica M6 and 35mm 1.4 ASPH lens, the simple combination cost me much more than $3,000. Or when I moved into a Mamiya 7 system, body, 43mm and 150mm cost me well over $3,000. Or when I purchased to a RZ67pro system, body, a number of 120 and 220 backs, 65mm, 127mm, 150mm SF, 180mm, 180mm SF, 250mm, AE prism, motor drive, cost me well over $3,000. I will not even go into the assortment of 8x10 camera gear. (Most of which will be on Ebay shortly if I get the 5D.)
Why spend so much on camera gear? Simple, I love photography, and I cannot image my life without it. It is a passport to adventure, from far away lands to my backyard. It presents problems and I love to solve problems. It is rewarding in ways money cannot touch. Others of course have their own reasons, all I know are my own.
The bottom-line for me (others have their own reasons) is if you want quality results you will have to be willing to pay the price for that quality in terms of dollars and time refining your skills. As you can read I have a history of paying for what I see as high quality photographic instruments, and have spent well over 35 years learning the art to produce worthwhile results to me.
Yet I am only a beginner compared to most professional photographers I know. But we all share the love of the art from a early age of 11 or so years old. And like most photographers I know, I am not made of money either, I don't make millions every year nor do I spend beyond my means, like there is no tomorrow. I cut back spending, save & invest, then choose wisely.
To me, the difference is professionals are driven by completition and their customer's requirement for product quality and turn around time demands. They require high reliability and other attributes from their tools to make a good living. Whereas I am my own judge and jury, and take my time, and treat my gear as if it were a high end microscope, with tender care and attention. I also spend far more time in taking the shot and do not have the high batting average as the pros of getting those once in a lifetime shots. Also as a engineer, I do not depend on photography for a living, which is the major difference, but still strive to be the best I can be.
Right now I am considering the 5D since it the only full frame DSLR I can afford and for the reasons Phil has listed. I think it will allow me to downsize my inventory of camera gear quite a bit (making my wife very happy & a happy wife is a happy life) and still be able to produce the final images I desire. Also no one is forcing to buy the camera it is my choice one way or the other.
At this point I would like to take the time to thank Phil for his intelligent website and thoughtful reviews and other readings. Phil sees things clearly (and with a good sense of humor), he has no hidden agendas, or axe to grind, as such I value his opinions and insight more than others.
His 5D review will only help me make the right choice for me, and I will take into account actual 5D owner comments as well, knowing that no camera is perfect and no photographer is either. The final decision will be made by me and me alone, when I have some hands on experience with the camera and form my own opinions. Also, I am just thankful we have so many camera systems to choose from, and over a wide price range.
-- Don Farra, March 9, 2006
Thanks for the review, good stuff. A couple of points:- While the 5D doesn't support AA batteries, its battery grip (BG-E4) supports either two BP-511A batteries, or 6 AA, so at least there's an option.
- For the previous commenter, the *field of view* pixel density between the 5D and 20D/350D is the same, AFAICT. That is, an 8MP center crop from a 5D covers virtually the same view as the full image from the 350D/20D at the same focal length, and uses the same portion of the lens. Thus, those of us who routinely max out our lenses and take advantage of the "crop factor" of our 350Ds may not *gain* pixels with the 5D in those situations, but we won't lose any either.
- The ISO 50 setting seems to be one of the more interesting features for me, as it gives me more flexibility over DoF in bright lighting. Nice that they added this.
- I wonder whether ISO 3200 is any better than just pushing ISO 1600 by a stop in RAW processing software? I suspect that it is better, not just because pushing digital (i.e., quantized) samples leads to rounding issues, but because the sensor's SNR is not completely linear to the sensitivity setting.
- Prediction: within a few years, we see cameras that sample the sensor at multiple ISO settings during the same exposure (like how Foveon sensors sample multiple colors, but different tech involved). When that happens, the latitude of digital photography will be incredible. Can't wait.
-- Richard Tallent, March 22, 2006
Imagine the excitement I felt when my wife graciously surprised me with a Canon 5D body for my birthday slightly more than a month ago. The image quality of the first few shoots absolutely sizzled. Nothing short of fabulous. However, the honeymoon with the 5D ended last weekend after shooting a wedding with the camera. Ugly, ugly, ugly greenish tinged color bands in a significant number of the image files. Canon says they know about this problem, are working on improving the problem but also say they can't eliminate it entirely. If I had had ANY prior knowledge of the the camera's propensity to do this, I would have graciously [or perhaps not so graciously] begged my smiling wife for the receipt and would have returned the body to the local camera shop from where it was purchased the very next day. I'm so SICK of the banding problem in this poor bride & groom's images that I could just puke. Canon says to avoid shooting at ISO's higher than 800. Guess what folks: I was shooting at 400. Here's what Canon has to say about the banding problem: http://www.dslrphoto.com/2006/02/23/chuck-westfall-comments-on-5d-camera-banding-issues/ By the way, I don't own or shoot with any of the lenses mentioned in Chuck Westfall's article. Thanks Canon, for nothing.
-- Martin Torre, April 26, 2006
I too bought a Canon 5D, and unlike the previous poster, I have so far been very pleased with it. I've only taken about 900 pictures so far, but have not experienced any problems whatsoever. No banding, no odd coloring, nothing... everything's been great.
-- Trevis Rothwell, May 9, 2006
I've had the 5D for about three months now and it is by far the best camera I have ever owned. The large image sensor certainly makes a HUGE difference. This was especially noticable in first pictures I took at the Monterey Bay Aquarium in March. I set ISO to 3200, opened my my lens to 4.0 and started shooting away. When I downloaded these pics to my computer, the images blew me away! No noise evident whatsoever, despite shooting hand held in extremely low light at 3200 ISO!
-- Kerry Lyman, May 16, 2006
I enjoyed the 5D review and Phil's writing style as usual. I use one of those heavy 1DII bodies and shoot dance, often in dark places. I recently rented a 5D to use alongside it. Yes, the 5D images are beautiful and the noise is very low; the viewfinder is bright; the body is light in weight and battery life is very good. But, there were also a few things I did not like:I like having so many focusing points on the 1DII. I like an easy way to change focusing point; the 5D joystick was a mess. I like rapid autofocus. Compared to the 1D, the 5D is not fast! The AF points are small too, so it is sometimes difficult, to see exactly where you are focusing.
Lee
-- Lee Hammond, June 16, 2006