Canon 5D Mk1 - Camera to Compliment?

cedgecombe said:

I am really enjoying the Canon 5D Mk1 at the moment, I don't know why but the images I take with it give me goosebumps especially with the 85mm f1.8. I just feel a real connection with this camera, it's back to basics, I love the simplicity of it and the images have a real special feel to them, later cameras I've tried seem to give 'flatter' images.

I would absolutely love something to compliment it so I can continue justifying the purchase of lenses for it.....

What I would want a supplementary canon or EF compatible camera to do?

• Perform well with EF lenses
• Auto ISO [maybe the Canon 5D is a little too simple in this regards]
• Have a bit better burst rate and AF performance for a bit of 'action/sports'
• Have more resolution for cropping; 13mb is a little limiting at times.
• Still have an amazing character and feel/look to the images
• IBIS - I think handholding 85/135mm lenses would benefit from having IBIS [nice to have]
• Equipped with better MF aids (I can't MF vintage lenses on the 5D)
• Tilt or flip screen [nice to have]
• Full Frame [i wouldn't rule out APS-C though]

I did try a Canon R8 last year but I wasn't enamoured with the colours/sensor. Would the R6 be better as I know the sensor is a little different or would an older DSLR fit the bill or even a camera that I could adapt EF lenses to? I did adapt them to a Sony A9 but Sony's leave me a little cold (I don't feel connected to them).

Or how do EF lenses mount on Nikon cameras?

Click to expand...

If you want all of that you need to go mirrorless. As for colors I think R8 looks slightly better than R6 which is too magenta. But it also depends on profiles of course.

The old 6D is about as close as it gets to the old look. The 6D Mark II is also quite punchy with better AF, flippy screen and higher res.

There is no perfect camera. You need to find a good balance.

Hey cedgecombe, why not a 1Dx Mark II? It has everything except a tilt screen. Auction prices for this camera and its accessories continue to fall. I acquired one recently for under 850.US., which seems good value for money. Best camera I've ever used, IMO. Paradoxically, I'm having a lot of fun with it as a street shooter. Obviously it can't be hidden, people notice it and engage with me.

Today I bought a Canon wireless file transmitter accessory for under 100. (they are 600 new). I've also acquired the Canon wireless shutter release, wireless flash transmitter, (which I haven't even tried yet), the Canon hand grip and a speedlight, for pennies on the dollar. What's up with that, is the move to mirrorless flooding the zone with DSLR equipment?

Anyhoo, the files from the camera are juicy, if you know what I mean, I think they can stand up to a lot of editing.







Lastly, regarding the 1Dx Mark II,I have to say something about the durability. Once, crossing Broadway, my hat blew off. I tripped trying to retrieve it and fell flat on the 1Dx Mark 1 I was carrying. No damage. Another time, I'm embarrased to say, I'd had a little too much whatever and the Mark 1 went down hard. Again, no damage to the camera. And recently, I set out with the Mark II, deciding to carry it vertically, but I didn't screw the strap holder onto the baseplate tight enough. It came out, camera went to sidewalk. Again, no damage. I know I sound klutzy, but I blame it on age, I'll be 80 next birthday. Well, this got long and involved, didn't it?



--

JohnK
Off the record.

That is a monster, thanks for the suggestion and the story though.

Thanks to boldcolours to, I scrolled down too fast.

cedgecombe said:

I am really enjoying the Canon 5D Mk1 at the moment, I don't know why but the images I take with it give me goosebumps especially with the 85mm f1.8. I just feel a real connection with this camera, it's back to basics, I love the simplicity of it and the images have a real special feel to them, later cameras I've tried seem to give 'flatter' images.

I would absolutely love something to compliment it so I can continue justifying the purchase of lenses for it.....

What I would want a supplementary canon or EF compatible camera to do?

• Perform well with EF lenses
• Auto ISO [maybe the Canon 5D is a little too simple in this regards]
• Have a bit better burst rate and AF performance for a bit of 'action/sports'
• Have more resolution for cropping; 13mb is a little limiting at times.
• Still have an amazing character and feel/look to the images
• IBIS - I think handholding 85/135mm lenses would benefit from having IBIS [nice to have]
• Equipped with better MF aids (I can't MF vintage lenses on the 5D)
• Tilt or flip screen [nice to have]
• Full Frame [i wouldn't rule out APS-C though]

I did try a Canon R8 last year but I wasn't enamoured with the colours/sensor. Would the R6 be better as I know the sensor is a little different or would an older DSLR fit the bill or even a camera that I could adapt EF lenses to? I did adapt them to a Sony A9 but Sony's leave me a little cold (I don't feel connected to them).

Or how do EF lenses mount on Nikon cameras?

Click to expand...

Obviously, for IBIS you need to go mirrorless. However, if you have a fast computer, you can use high ISO and AI Denoise. I get great results with my 6D up to ISO 12800. Here is an example:







--

cedgecombe said:

I am really enjoying the Canon 5D Mk1 at the moment, I don't know why but the images I take with it give me goosebumps especially with the 85mm f1.8. I just feel a real connection with this camera, it's back to basics, I love the simplicity of it and the images have a real special feel to them, later cameras I've tried seem to give 'flatter' images.

I would absolutely love something to compliment it so I can continue justifying the purchase of lenses for it.....

What I would want a supplementary canon or EF compatible camera to do?

• Perform well with EF lenses
• Auto ISO [maybe the Canon 5D is a little too simple in this regards]
• Have a bit better burst rate and AF performance for a bit of 'action/sports'
• Have more resolution for cropping; 13mb is a little limiting at times.
• Still have an amazing character and feel/look to the images
• IBIS - I think handholding 85/135mm lenses would benefit from having IBIS [nice to have]
• Equipped with better MF aids (I can't MF vintage lenses on the 5D)
• Tilt or flip screen [nice to have]
• Full Frame [i wouldn't rule out APS-C though]

I did try a Canon R8 last year but I wasn't enamoured with the colours/sensor. Would the R6 be better as I know the sensor is a little different or would an older DSLR fit the bill or even a camera that I could adapt EF lenses to? I did adapt them to a Sony A9 but Sony's leave me a little cold (I don't feel connected to them).

Or how do EF lenses mount on Nikon cameras?

Click to expand...

Think about a used 1Ds mark II or III. II is basically a 5D I regarding colours, although it has much better AF. The D's III has better ISO performance, better AF, bigger vf, better burst and almost double the resolution with still the "ancient" "Canon colours" (I like the Ds II and 5D I more though).

just get the 6d m1, check out martin castein's youtube channel where he answers your question. the r8 is a horrible camera colorwise. the rp is much better in this regard.

xuseralpha said:

just get the 6d m1, check out martin castein's youtube channel where he answers your question. the r8 is a horrible camera colorwise. the rp is much better in this regard.

Click to expand...

I am not sure I agree with this statement - it could be a slight hyperbole (IMO).

These are two images I took after receiving my R8 (before I sold my 6D ii - same sensor as RP). They were shot a few minutes apart, both using tripod & 2 second timer, both using the same EF 24-105L ii lens, both at 50mm, f8 & ISO100. The only difference was the 6D ii had a 1/80th shutter speed vs the R8 1/60th.

I just processing both from the RAW files in DxO using the exact same (default settings).





Since I am very familiar with this scene (it is looking up the road outside my house), I would suggest that the R8 shades of green are probably a little more realistic than the 6D ii greens with the extra yellow tinge (warmer). The R8 white car looks whiter than 6D ii white car.

Either way, not a huge difference IMO, especially considering that the minor difference in exposure may account for some of the difference. However, since colour perception is a somewhat subjective thing, it is really up to the user/viewer to decide where their preference lays.

What is perhaps more interesting is the additional detail in the sandstone wall that the R8 picked up when compared to the 6D ii (same lens, essentially same settings).

Andy01 said:

xuseralpha said:

just get the 6d m1, check out martin castein's youtube channel where he answers your question. the r8 is a horrible camera colorwise. the rp is much better in this regard.

Click to expand...

I am not sure I agree with this statement - it could be a slight hyperbole (IMO).

These are two images I took after receiving my R8 (before I sold my 6D ii - same sensor as RP). They were shot a few minutes apart, both using tripod & 2 second timer, both using the same EF 24-105L ii lens, both at 50mm, f8 & ISO100. The only difference was the 6D ii had a 1/80th shutter speed vs the R8 1/60th.

I just processing both from the RAW files in DxO using the exact same (default settings).





Since I am very familiar with this scene (it is looking up the road outside my house), I would suggest that the R8 shades of green are probably a little more realistic than the 6D ii greens with the extra yellow tinge (warmer). The R8 white car looks whiter than 6D ii white car.

Either way, not a huge difference IMO, especially considering that the minor difference in exposure may account for some of the difference. However, since colour perception is a somewhat subjective thing, it is really up to the user/viewer to decide where their preference lays.

What is perhaps more interesting is the additional detail in the sandstone wall that the R8 picked up when compared to the 6D ii (same lens, essentially same settings).

Click to expand...

I prefer the 6D2 version. I find the R8 too clinical and cold. Nothing that can't be fixed of course but if we are talking about what is served on the plate in front of you I prefer it (or any older Canon for that matter)

Technical accuracy is not always a good thing but I think Canon had video and LUT in mind when they flushed their legendary signature colors down in the toilet. It's easier to grade a flat and neutral file. But it also means more work for photographers. I spend way more time on color work now than I used to

I was talking about the 6dm1, I find most cameras after 2012 horrible, incl. the 6dm2. also, I care about correct skin tones... for landscape your camera doesn't matter that much but the thin cfas certainly don't help with getting purer greens

xuseralpha said:

I was talking about the 6dm1, I find most cameras after 2012 horrible, incl. the 6dm2. also, I care about correct skin tones... for landscape your camera doesn't matter that much but the thin cfas certainly don't help with getting purer greens

Click to expand...

I don't know if you were supposed to answer me but my reply was to Andy and his comparison between the R8 and 6D II above.

I agree though that the first 6D has more pleasing files to the eye. Especially in overcast weather and WB around 6500K. It gets very nostalgic with a nice brown Kodak-vibe right out of the camera.

Thanks for all the continued comments. I'm still unsure which way I am going to go but you have all given me some food for thought.

If you want great color, the camera you have is awesome. To get similar color from other cameras, a high quality color profile is needed, and also a correct white balance setting on post-processing.

So you could use the high quality color profiles that are available in RawTherapee for many cameras, and then take care to set the white balance correctly.

mburns9 said:

If you want great color, the camera you have is awesome. To get similar color from other cameras, a high quality color profile is needed, and also a correct white balance setting on post-processing.

So you could use the high quality color profiles that are available in RawTherapee for many cameras, and then take care to set the white balance correctly.

Click to expand...

To get the colors you want, yes you need a good profile and then fall into the deep holes of color grading

However just a profile doesn't mean much if you want a certain look - unless that profile happens to render the way you want. Some cameras tend to have "eye pleasing" profiles (mostly entry-level models) where no further post processing is expected.

The really old Canons tend to give that bright, vivid crowdpleasing look (even the pro models) but they have moved away from that which means more work in post but also more flexibility for most users.

The above is mostly for Lightroom/ACR. Other software might have a completely different look. But it seems developers are aware of the situation and work hard to get AI color matching, adaptive profiles etc to make a colorists life easier. So far I am not really impressed.