5D Mk II -- the most versatile camera in the world

[Kabe Luna]

...while the photographer burned frames hoping to capture just the right moment? I used to do this kind of thing with film and when you have no way to confirm the image (no polaroid, no LCD) but MUST get the shot, you simply take lots and lots of pictures. I've burned as many as three rolls of 36-exposure 35mm film in a manual wind camera trying to ensure I've got as close to the pivotal moment of an action as possible.

Shooting a live sport, like ballet during the performance, it is all about timing (and luck), but with posed studio shots of active subjects (where you don't want the 'keeper' to be on a polaroid) with benefit of a motor-driven camera with high framing rate, it's about repetition (and, again, luck ;-)

When was the last time that you saw a photographer shooting ballet
with their finger on the button, ripping off shots as fast as the
camera would allow? There are 2 possible answers: The first is never.
The second is, the last time that photographer was allowed in the
house to shoot!

It's all about timing. Know your shot. Find the shot. Take the shot.

like so?:



--



http://gcphotoblog.com

'if we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called 'research'.'
(attributed to Einstein)

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com

 

[Fearless_Photog]

The 5D Mark II has fast enough AF in mirror up video mode to track moving subjects when shooting sports? Can you post some examples? If contrast detection AF has suddently advanced that fast in the last year we might as well get rid of these bulkly mirror dependent phase detection systems, right?

 

[photoshrink]

Thanks for the update; but where can I read about this other guy, Malgehaes, to confirm your statement?

Also, do you know if Malgehaes used a Canon or a Nikon? I'm pretty sure i read that Magellan shot with a Canon, and a 16-35L II and 70-200 L IS 2.8. I've seen some of his pics. Outstanding! That's what apparently got the English and the Spanish to go out and look for themselves.
--
Photoshrink, Ph.D.

'If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? And if
not now, when?'

 

[Sal Baker]

In Antarctica it's not

Actually, 20 5DII's survived the trip fine even though shooting
conditions were beyond the camera's specs.

In what way were the conditions "beyond the camera's specs"?

Moisture that could enter the camera. No DSLRs are covered for this under warranty. If the cameras failed from moisture, then moisture entered the camera.

Only 1 D3x, and 2 A900's survived the trip.

That's because there was only one D3x and two A900s on the trip.

Exactly! Silly comparison, no?

Can you find one other 5DII in the world that failed due to moisture
other than the 3 on that one trip that were rained on then put in
plastic bags wet?

Do you actually expect someone to break into Canon headquarters and
go through all their service records to see if any other 5D2s have
failed because of moisture or any other weather related conditions?
Do you actually believe that every failure is reported on this forum?

Well, the only 3 reports of failures in the world have been repeated in this forum and other Internet forums for weeks. If any other cameras failed, you really think the Internet would be dead silent on the issue? Have you broken into Nikon and Sony's headquarters to see if their cameras are failing? Not every failure is reported on this forum. Well, there was the D3 that had water damage that was reported in the Nikon forum, so that makes 3 bad 5DII's and 1 bad D3. This makes Nikon second worse, only 2 failures behind Canon.

And what's this about being rained on? At least two of the 5D2s that
failed were covered and were not rained on and there's no evidence to
show that they were put in plastic bags while they were "wet".

Then how did water get to the camera enough to corrode metal parts? If the camera failed due to moisture, it must have been exposed to moisture.

The weather conditions in Antarctica during that trip were actually
better than a lot of ordinary days here in the Pacific Northwest and
most other places in the world during the winter. Even a summer day
in the Pacific Northwest can be extremely wet, and if you had ever
been in the Rocky Mountains you would know that it can be rainy,
windy, cold, hot, and hail or snow all in the same day, and that's in
the summer. Winters are ferocious.

Then it should be easy to find other reports of 5DII moisture failures in the Pacific Northwest and most other places in the world during the Winter.

A camera isn't much good if it can only be used in a climate
controlled, indoor environment and has to be babied all the time. For
three grand, a camera should be impervious to any weather conditions.

So if a consumer level camera is used with temperatures at the freezing mark, wind, sea salt and drizzle, on an open boat, and out 26 5DII's, 3 are damaged from the exposure, how does that equate to the camera only being useable indoors?

There have been many posts from owners who have used the 5DII in rain and snow. Even Phil's (supposedly Nikon slanted) review said the camera worked fine after exposure to rain and snow.

Sal

--

 

[GeorgeD200]

More trolls espousing the comparative virtues of the cameras that they'd love to own.

Wow, get out the crown for most versatile camera in the world, we have a new winner!

It's too bad you can't mate it with crop sensor lenses, then you could put on it the most versatile lens in the worlds: the Tamron 18-250mm! Wow wouldn't that be the combo! Unparallelled versatility.

If that's not an empty accolade, I don't know what is. Ever heard of "The Right Tool for the Job?"

 

[PhotoKhan]

Thanks for the update; but where can I read about this other guy,
Malgehaes, to confirm your statement?

Errr...Magalhães IS Magellan...the name has been inappropriately "translated" to English.

Magalhães should not be written Magellan in English no more than we Portuguese speaking people also don't write phonetically adapted names like Francisco Drago, instead of Francis Drake or Guilherme Suspiro instead of William Shakespeare.

It just leads up to confusion as your reply so aptly demonstrates.

PK
--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)

 

[Sal Baker]

Show me classic sports photography that was done at 1/125s.

The most versatile Canon has always been the 1D(any mark). The most
versatile camera (of any make) is probably the D3. If you think
differently then you are just another practicing member of the 5D
religious cult.

I will give you that, for the price, the 5D is probably the most
versatile media capturing device.

Best regards,
Alex

Exactly correct...and I did claim the D700 is the best DSLR for most
users and will defend that statement with facts. That doesn't mean
the D700 is absolutely the best or vice versa.

But a 5D2 is not going to be a top pick for sports, action or even
kids in an unbiased world. Faster cameras with better AF modules from
both Canon or Nikon are simply better suited for such tasks. That's
why a lot of D700/D3 owners are not rushing out to buy 25MP cameras
until they speed up a bit more.

D800x or 5D MKIII.....9FPS, FULL pro AF, smaller body, 13 FPS in DX
mode....until then I'll keep my D700 and a lot of people will keep
their 5D's. MOST users simply don't need 20 or 25MP. But getting the
shot in the first place is kinda important.

And 8 or 9 FPS is not "spray and pray." That's what amateurs with
slow cameras want to believe. Plenty of professionals and amateurs
employ the high frame rate with great success and it takes even more
skill to make it work well.

This is all a pretty useless debate. It's like going to a paint forum and declaring that red is better than green.

No one can say what "most people" want in a camera. Certainly the 5DII is selling as fast or faster than any FF DSLR, and it's only been shipping for a couple of months.

For me the D700 would be one of the worse cameras I could buy as it doesn't do 1080p video and it's not 20+mp. I don't care about shooting sports or birds. There must be many users like me or the 5DII wouldn't be such a huge hit for Canon.

Certainly the 5DII has broad appeal. Otherwise there wouldn't be so much continued interest from Nikon users who come here to talk about it.

Sal

 

[rwbaron]

there's no debating it: the 5D Mk II is the world's most versatile camera.

Respectfully disagree, it's a great camera but exactly NOT a
versatile camera. It's quite slow,

i don't agree: 3.9 fps is not "quite slow".

it has inferior AF module compared
to what's available today, ....

i didn't write that it's the very best in every parameter. on the
contrary, i explicitly wrote that it isn't

it has no PUFlash

touche' -- the only valid point anyone has raised in this thread. i
probably overlooked it because, personally, i wouldn't take a picture
of my worst enemy with in-camera flash. but, that's just me. a lot
of people do use in-camera flash, and it's a valid criticism to point
out that its absence does diminish the 5DII's versatility.

however, although i don't pretend to understand what's inside the
"black box", some have written that the HD video capability occupies
the space that in-camera flash would have required. seen in this
light, adding a flash to a dSLR is a simple matter, whereas not
having HD video means significantly less versatility.

and it doesn't like
rain, humid nor cold conditions...

again, this is highly specialized stuff -- not the stuff of general
versatility.

Great camera for stills, portraiture, weddings and landscape, but NOT
versatile...

tellingly , no one has named a more versatile alternative.

There are plenty of more versatile still cameras. Canon 1DsIII, Nikon
D700 and Nikon D3.

And if video capture is your definition of versatility, there's the
Nikon D90 with a bit faster framing rate and an AF module that's more
adept at focus tracking and a pop-up flash.

I thought the D90 has a slower framing rate (24 vs 30 for the mkII).
I've also read that the video files from the D90, due to the format
used, are no where near the 5D's quality but I've no personal
experience with either.

720 vs 1080? Aren't we splitting hairs here relative to the quality
loss from a full-size capture from either device?

I did not realize you were refering to "captures" from video. When you mentioned a faster frame rate I thought you were referring to actual video. In this sense I believe the 5DmkII is 30 FPS and the D90 is 24.

As far as "format" is concerned I apparently was not clear. I believe the D90 records in a "Motion JPEG" format whereas the 5DmkII Video clips are recorded as Quicktime MOV files with H.264/MPEG-4 compressed video and uncompressed PCM audio. I'm not very knowledgeable on video but from what I've read and heard this allows for better quality video files from the 5DmkII which has nothing to do with the video resolution but I'm certain someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.

 

[Kabe Luna]

In Antarctica it's not

Actually, 20 5DII's survived the trip fine even though shooting
conditions were beyond the camera's specs.

In what way were the conditions "beyond the camera's specs"?

Moisture that could enter the camera. No DSLRs are covered for this
under warranty. If the cameras failed from moisture, then moisture
entered the camera.

Yes, but no other DSLRs experienced failures because of this, either. Furthermore, two of the failed cameras were covered to protect from rain, so the only moisture they should have been susceptible to during shooting would be humidity, which shouldn't be an issue with a well-sealed camera. Since there were no failures of competing cameras, two possible conclusions are that 1) the 5DII is not as well sealed as the others or 2) the others are no better sealed but are designed with vulnerable electronics better isolated from points of moisture entry. Either way, the indication is that the 5DII is less well suited to use in hostile environments than the other cameras used and not experiencing failure during the expedition.

Only 1 D3x, and 2 A900's survived the trip.

That's because there was only one D3x and two A900s on the trip.

Exactly! Silly comparison, no?

Can you find one other 5DII in the world that failed due to moisture
other than the 3 on that one trip that were rained on then put in
plastic bags wet?

Do you actually expect someone to break into Canon headquarters and
go through all their service records to see if any other 5D2s have
failed because of moisture or any other weather related conditions?
Do you actually believe that every failure is reported on this forum?

Well, the only 3 reports of failures in the world have been repeated
in this forum and other Internet forums for weeks. If any other
cameras failed, you really think the Internet would be dead silent on
the issue? Have you broken into Nikon and Sony's headquarters to see
if their cameras are failing? Not every failure is reported on this
forum. Well, there was the D3 that had water damage that was
reported in the Nikon forum, so that makes 3 bad 5DII's and 1 bad D3.
This makes Nikon second worse, only 2 failures behind Canon.

And what's this about being rained on? At least two of the 5D2s that
failed were covered and were not rained on and there's no evidence to
show that they were put in plastic bags while they were "wet".

Then how did water get to the camera enough to corrode metal parts?
If the camera failed due to moisture, it must have been exposed to
moisture.

The weather conditions in Antarctica during that trip were actually
better than a lot of ordinary days here in the Pacific Northwest and
most other places in the world during the winter. Even a summer day
in the Pacific Northwest can be extremely wet, and if you had ever
been in the Rocky Mountains you would know that it can be rainy,
windy, cold, hot, and hail or snow all in the same day, and that's in
the summer. Winters are ferocious.

Then it should be easy to find other reports of 5DII moisture
failures in the Pacific Northwest and most other places in the world
during the Winter.

A camera isn't much good if it can only be used in a climate
controlled, indoor environment and has to be babied all the time. For
three grand, a camera should be impervious to any weather conditions.

So if a consumer level camera is used with temperatures at the
freezing mark, wind, sea salt and drizzle, on an open boat, and out
26 5DII's, 3 are damaged from the exposure, how does that equate to
the camera only being useable indoors?

There have been many posts from owners who have used the 5DII in rain
and snow. Even Phil's (supposedly Nikon slanted) review said the
camera worked fine after exposure to rain and snow.

Sal

--

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com

 

[photoshrink]

be able to remember, let alone spell Mageallae (I think I misspelled it).

Most foreign words are anglicized by English speakers. But you raise an interesting point. I think French names may not be Anglicized, e.g. Michel Foucault. Spanish, too: Julio Yglesias. Words and names in foreign alphabets have to be Anglicized (e.g. Russian Cyrillic, Israeli Hebrew, Asian languages). I wonder, now, when we Anglicize and when we don't. Anyway, how do you pronounce Magellan's name in Portuguese (can you write it phonetically for me)? Thanks.
best,
--
Photoshrink, Ph.D.

'If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? And if
not now, when?'

 

[rwbaron]

In Antarctica it's not

Actually, 20 5DII's survived the trip fine even though shooting
conditions were beyond the camera's specs.

In what way were the conditions "beyond the camera's specs"?

Moisture that could enter the camera. No DSLRs are covered for this
under warranty. If the cameras failed from moisture, then moisture
entered the camera.

Yes, but no other DSLRs experienced failures because of this, either.
Furthermore, two of the failed cameras were covered to protect from
rain, so the only moisture they should have been susceptible to
during shooting would be humidity, which shouldn't be an issue with a
well-sealed camera. Since there were no failures of competing
cameras, two possible conclusions are that 1) the 5DII is not as well
sealed as the others or 2) the others are no better sealed but are
designed with vulnerable electronics better isolated from points of
moisture entry. Either way, the indication is that the 5DII is less
well suited to use in hostile environments than the other cameras
used and not experiencing failure during the expedition.

There is a third possible conclusion and that is the Kata rain covers used on I believe two of the 5DmkII's created a condition the camera was not designed for. Meaning, the cameras may have been fine without the rain covers.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.

 

[Sal Baker]

3.9 fps not fast enough for your daughter's soccer game or your son's
ballet recital? no problem -- just grab a still from its 30 fps HD
video. Sony can't do high ISOs, Nikons have barely more than half
the res, and neither has video.

there's no debating it: the 5D Mk II is thw orld's most versatile
camera.

You might want to come out of your cave and read up on the Nikon D3x.
It has more "res" than a 5D2. So does the Sony A900.

According to the review, the extra money for the D3x buys you the
same image quality as the 5DII, 9.5 for both, which is higher than
the A900's 8.5 IQ rating.

Which has nothing to do with what I, or the OP said. He used the term
"res", and said the Nikons have about half as much as the 5D2. He was
obviously referring to megapixels. The D3x and Sony A900 have more
megapixels than a 5D2. The image quality ratings in the reviews here
are a debatable subject and have a lot of variables.

If higher res doesn't result in better image quality what good is it?

Also, the 5D2 can't do 8 fps at full resolution like the D700, the
D90 does have video, and Sony can do high ISO, and since all cameras
suck at high ISOs, it doesn't really matter anyway. Oh, and neither
Canon nor Nikon has in body IS. Sony, Pentax, and Olympus do.

The D700 is only 12mp. Better to compare the 5DII to the D3x. The
5DII shoots twice as fast at FF 14-bit. No other DSLR does 1080p HD
video, but Nikon will catch up soon.

14 bit is mostly a marketing farce and the D3x doesn't have to be
used in 14 bit mode.

Certainly open to debate, but it's still impressive that a $5k less expensive camera beats the pro model if someone does like shooting at 14-bit.

There are other things where the 5D2 is inferior to other cameras,
but you'd know that already if you weren't making love to your 5D2
and instead were learning about what's available out there.

All cameras have weaknesses. But they aren't good for making love,
you should use them for their intended purpose. When one can get a
9.5 IQ from a $2,700 or an $8,000 camera, the consumer level camera
is a pretty nice bargain even with it's faults.

Well, that depends on the faults. To me, both cameras, and many
others, are way overpriced. The intended use of a camera is to work
properly and as advertised when it's turned on and to not fail for a
variety of reasons that should have been dealt with during factory
design and testing.

It's something we will have to get used to. The $8,000 D3x shipped to with misaligned viewfinders and AF points and had to be returned to Nikon. You would think this would not happen in the most expensive DSLR in the world. The new world economy is probably causing many manufacturers to cut corners at our expense.

Sal

 

[Sal Baker]

In Antarctica it's not

Actually, 20 5DII's survived the trip fine even though shooting
conditions were beyond the camera's specs.

In what way were the conditions "beyond the camera's specs"?

Moisture that could enter the camera. No DSLRs are covered for this
under warranty. If the cameras failed from moisture, then moisture
entered the camera.

Yes, but no other DSLRs experienced failures because of this, either.
Furthermore, two of the failed cameras were covered to protect from
rain, so the only moisture they should have been susceptible to
during shooting would be humidity, which shouldn't be an issue with a
well-sealed camera. Since there were no failures of competing
cameras, two possible conclusions are that 1) the 5DII is not as well
sealed as the others or 2) the others are no better sealed but are
designed with vulnerable electronics better isolated from points of
moisture entry. Either way, the indication is that the 5DII is less
well suited to use in hostile environments than the other cameras
used and not experiencing failure during the expedition.

Humidity, especially at freezing temperatures with sea air and drizzle, can damage any camera no matter how well they are sealed. The 5DII has minimal weather sealing, and I have always suspected it was only beefed up to help keep dust out of the camera.

It's been reported here many times that the conditions on that trip were no worse than most cities during winter. And since no one else in these other cities anywhere in the world have reported any moisture problems, I have no fears about what happened to 3 users on a cold boat ride. MY XT and 30D have survived worse conditions during Boston winters at the harbor. I'm just careful I guess.

But I still think that comparing a sample of 26 cameras to a sample of one or two might not be particularly valuable, and certainly not alarming to a potential owner like me.

Cheers.

Sal

 

[wildlife1212]

HDTV mode gives you 1.1 Megapixel photo

even pocket camera has better resolution

.

 

[wildlife1212]

have a look...

unless perfectly Static object

 

[DotCom Editor]

--
I coulda had a V8 -- but I bought a 1D Mark III instead

When I ask which Canon lenses are best,
people tell me to 'go to L.'

Waiter, hold the 1Ds Mark III; I'll have a 5D Mark II instead

 

[PhotoKhan]

No, I wouldn't do such a cruel thing to you.

The darn word has some of the most difficult sounds to pronounce for any English speaking person.

Probably the actual reason they went against common translation rules on this one.



PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)

 

[Kabe Luna]

...and I've read the theory, but as cold as it was, I doubt there the users hands were warm enough to cause significant condensation. But I could very well be wrong.

In Antarctica it's not

Actually, 20 5DII's survived the trip fine even though shooting
conditions were beyond the camera's specs.

In what way were the conditions "beyond the camera's specs"?

Moisture that could enter the camera. No DSLRs are covered for this
under warranty. If the cameras failed from moisture, then moisture
entered the camera.

Yes, but no other DSLRs experienced failures because of this, either.
Furthermore, two of the failed cameras were covered to protect from
rain, so the only moisture they should have been susceptible to
during shooting would be humidity, which shouldn't be an issue with a
well-sealed camera. Since there were no failures of competing
cameras, two possible conclusions are that 1) the 5DII is not as well
sealed as the others or 2) the others are no better sealed but are
designed with vulnerable electronics better isolated from points of
moisture entry. Either way, the indication is that the 5DII is less
well suited to use in hostile environments than the other cameras
used and not experiencing failure during the expedition.

There is a third possible conclusion and that is the Kata rain covers
used on I believe two of the 5DmkII's created a condition the camera
was not designed for. Meaning, the cameras may have been fine
without the rain covers.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com

 

[GaryJP]

there's no debating it: the 5D Mk II is thw orld's most versatile
camera.

Versatile or whatever a color fidelity problem is reported in 5DII.

It transforms blue color to purple, that might not bother you but my
eyes clearly discern blue and purple.

That ONE guy "reported" it here too. It's a blown blue channel. He was also using jpeg picture styles.

It could have been fixed most simply if he'd kept an eye on the histogram when shooting.

Even on jpeg I've played with his images and can see it's user error. Even in the images posted it's often fixable just by taking down the exposure.

Believe it or not, many people have managed to shoot blue neon lights using Canon cameras. And I can easily replicate his mistake.

It's reported by some that men have never walked on the moon too.

--
http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

 

[Thisjustin]

That's just about the most stupidest thing I've heard (yea thats a joke for all of you with out a sense of humor)

Have you ever taken a frame of HD Video? ITS TERRIBLE! most frames from video are horribly blurry. Horribly. Don't disagree that its a great camera but i still think the D700 has it beat in the versatility department. Personally i wish they'd make a 6-8mp full frame. I have no interest in uber resolution or enormous files.