600D vs 5D Mk.I Worth Upgrad(?)ing?

I am currently using a 600D, a crop sensor DSLR, and I am willing to buy a affordable full-frame DSLR.

I've found a used original 5D to be quite cheap, and I am wondering if it is worth upgrad(?)ing (Can I consider it an 'ugrade'?)

The 5D is about 6 years older and it has less megapixels than the 600D (18MP v 12.8MP), which is still usable (I think), but the most important part is that it has a full frame sensor, and apart from performance I heard that it has that 'film' look from its sensor, and not to mention its satisfying shutter sound

I find my 600D to be quite noisy (ISO above 1600 is unusable most times, and I am always forced to use noise reduction at relatively low ISOs when editing my images), which I find very annoying, and I wonder if the older 5D will be able to be an noticable upgrade in that.

Also the AF system, I think it is the same..? 9 AF points and one cross point at the center for both the 5D and the 600D.

I'm hoping maybe the 5D has a slightly better AF performance than the 600D as the 5D is a higher end model, but I also do realise it is much older too.

I've heard about the 5DMII's AF problems and I wonder if the original 5D had the same problem too?

My 600D isn't good at AF either, I find a lens aperture larger than f/2.8 almost unusable to take a sharp image with my 600D.

Maybe I am asking for too much for such a old DSLR?

First of all, this thread is very interesting to me as I'm (hopefully) selling my 600d in 2 days.

I've found a used original 5D to be quite cheap, and I am wondering if it is worth upgrad(?)ing (Can I consider it an 'ugrade'?)

I'm not entirely sure, but I think in some ways "yes".

I find my 600D to be quite noisy (ISO above 1600 is unusable most times, and I am always forced to use noise reduction at relatively low ISOs when editing my images), which I find very annoying, and I wonder if the older 5D will be able to be an noticable upgrade in that.

I also find my 600d quite noisy. (Keep in mind that there is always DxO's amazing denoising - DeepPrime).

I'm not entirely sure about the noise. The 5d is 6 years (!!) older.

Also the AF system, I think it is the same..? 9 AF points and one cross point at the center for both the 5D and the 600D.

I'm hoping maybe the 5D has a slightly better AF performance than the 600D as the 5D is a higher end model, but I also do realise it is much older too.

Again, I'm not entirely sure. I read somewhere that the 5d has 6 "invisible" AF points which supposedly help with tracking.

I've heard about the 5DMII's AF problems and I wonder if the original 5D had the same problem too?

I dunno.

My 600D isn't good at AF either, I find a lens aperture larger than f/2.8 almost unusable to take a sharp image with my 600D.

I find my AF fine. (I recently wrote a review, including AF (here ) of the 600d.)

Maybe I am asking for too much for such a old DSLR?

Possibly. I've been investigating the same question, and the 5d seems to be a step backwards in practically every way apart from being full frame.

The Internet is full of (modern) reviews of the 5d. Here are a few videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbVrSrMBSjY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbVrSrMBSjY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph0CwbOx7Us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo-ObnBWdAs&t=202s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9ycPeBjNXE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfZWup8MRtQ

In particular (btw, I have not watched this):

This is an ISO comparison, including the 5d mk2 and (WOW) the R5. Looks interesting.

I'm getting the original 7D.

Yes, the 6D has excellent ISO performance. It also has other goodies (eg. GPS).

I thought about getting the 5d, or (gasp!) a Nikon d700, or even waiting and saving up for a 6D.

But, there's not much point saving up for ages, if I couldn't afford any good lenses. EF-S lenses are a lot cheaper.

If I can afford it, I'm getting a canon ef-s 10-18mm IS STM. Apparently it's really good.

The 6D can also focus in really low light, I think -3 EV, which is apparently roughly equivalent to the light cast by a full moon.

Digirame wrote:

You might want to skip the original Canon 5D and look at the Canon 6D instead. Ask the people on the other forum. I found the Canon T3i (600D) to be fine at ISO1600 or lower. Sometimes I could go as high as ISO3200 if there was a lot of light. I sure do enjoy the Canon T7i (800D) camera in comparison for high ISO photos, all the way up to ISO12800.

+1

I was in the same boat, saved up a few more pennies and went with the 6D as it's hight iso IQ performance is alot better than the 5D.

I looked at 5D mkii as well but the 6D's single point from what I read is more accurate. Also here, used 6D's are cheaper than a used 5D mkii.

6D feels alot like my trust old T3, but IQ and iso wise it's light years ahead.

I would not upgrade to a 5-6 year older camera than that you have now. All improvements will be incremental at most. 
save your cash for a bigger leap forward !

brians1209 wrote:

I am currently using a 600D, a crop sensor DSLR, and I am willing to buy a affordable full-frame DSLR.

I've found a used original 5D to be quite cheap, and I am wondering if it is worth upgrad(?)ing (Can I consider it an 'ugrade'?)

For me, a big NO.

The 5d (the first one) is ca 2005 or so. AF is slow. The 9 AF points is clustered in the middle and is not useful with a large frame/sensor where you may have to focus outside it. It is a big step back in AF, and in other areas vs your 600d.

The 5D is about 6 years older and it has less megapixels than the 600D (18MP v 12.8MP), which is still usable (I think), but the most important part is that it has a full frame sensor, and apart from performance I heard that it has that 'film' look from its sensor, and not to mention its satisfying shutter sound

About 5 years ago, I bought a 5D ii, for about U$650. Sold it again in 6 months. Though the images it produced was amazing, the AF was atrocious. It's even worse with less lighted scenes/subjects. Mind you, that is already the 2009 mark II !

There is more to the 35FF sensor than the sensor size advantage alone!

I find my 600D to be quite noisy (ISO above 1600 is unusable most times, and I am always forced to use noise reduction at relatively low ISOs when editing my images), which I find very annoying, and I wonder if the older 5D will be able to be an noticable upgrade in that.

With the 5d ii, it was usable up to iso 3200 on a 20mp sensor. The 5d at 12mp, may be the same. You may get to go up to 3200, but in other areas, like AF, good video (or better video), etc. you are 5-6 years behind. Actually, based on the today's dslr standards, the 5d mark 1 is about 15 years behind!

Also the AF system, I think it is the same..? 9 AF points and one cross point at the center for both the 5D and the 600D.

I'm hoping maybe the 5D has a slightly better AF performance than the 600D as the 5D is a higher end model, but I also do realise it is much older too.

I don't think so. It may be a couple or 3x steps behind.

I've heard about the 5DMII's AF problems and I wonder if the original 5D had the same problem too?

My 600D isn't good at AF either, I find a lens aperture larger than f/2.8 almost unusable to take a sharp image with my 600D.

Maybe I am asking for too much for such a old DSLR?

You are expecting it to be better just because it is a 35FF. An 800d or 77d would serve you much better in all areas.

If you insist on a 35FF body, maybe opt for a 6d. IF you can get a 6d ii, even better. That's how good as it goes. The 6d is still hobbled by 9 AF points which is going to make accurate AF on such a large sensor. Best to go for the 6d ii if you can. 45 AF points with a more larger area of coverage.

In reality, it's going to hard (and expensive) to get dozens, much less hundreds of AF points with good coverage in a DSLR. You are talking of 5d iii or iv class and higher. And that will no longer fit your expected budget. Your best bet is still the 6d ii.

Or, like me, I just bought a used 77D for U$530 used last week + kit lens. It's very usable at iso 3200, and maybe up to 6400. 45 cross point AF in optical/slr mode, 62 AF points in live view mode. Fast accurate AF, 1080-60p video, time lapse, etc. etc. Got this as my 20d which I kept for sentimental reasons is not really useful or can keep up with today's shooting conditions. A 20d and 5d is basically the same tech FYI !!! So, don't expect too much from a 5D to improve or be better than your 600d!

To summarize, your best bet is still to go a higher model rebel. I highly recommend the 77d, 800d, or even the 250d. Or you can go for the newer 850d, though that is going to be expensive and outside your budget. I'd go for 2 or more generations than your 600d. So, a 700d or 750d/760d is minimum. Though I'd still recommend better the 77d/800d/250d if your budget permits.

For 35FF, try to stick with the 6d ii if you can.