Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Why would anyone want a 5D (original)?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Overread
Overread  63762 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 1:31 PM

So as the MIII hits the streets and people are offloading things the 5D price second hand has dropped fairly low (considering where it started) so I'm considering if there is any reason at all that I need consider a 5D camera body. I keep hearing about this amazing thing that is 35mm sensor size; but I'm sceptical as to if its worth actually getting one when I don't shoot portraits (of people) or weddings.

Add to that its rather lower class AF (compared to the MIII and my 7D) and its lack of auto sensor cleaning (I think) as well as its older body and ISO range as well as the fact that whatever one I get will be used. Is it worth it? Do I need that angle of view and would anything but my macro work and odd landscape benefit from it (and to be fair landscape wise I have an 8-16mm for crop and macro wise the smaller depth of field possible is the clear bonus over 1.6crop).

So convince me - I've yet to really work out the reason for wanting a 5D if there is one at all.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
29 Mar 2012 - 1:31 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Hugo
Hugo  9639 forum posts United Kingdom
29 Mar 2012 - 1:38 PM

It's 500 (the Mk1)
The Mk2 (on the shopping list!) seems yet to fall below 1200 second hand.

It is 7 years old? So getting on a bit.... Personally I'm not sure Mk1 is a very good buy (unless you are really short of cash) - the 'exciting' thing about the 5D is its ability to shoot in low light, I can't imagine that the 5DMk1 is too great on high ISO/noise.

rogerfry
rogerfry e2 Member 8509 forum postsrogerfry vcard United Kingdom
29 Mar 2012 - 2:55 PM


Quote:

So convince me - I've yet to really work out the reason for wanting a 5D if there is one at all.

The quality of the files they produce is one good reason.....they have a more "painterly" feel to them than the 7D. If you can find a low mileage one for around the 500 mark, it's certainly worth considering.

If you know anyone who's got one, see if you can run a card through it, and compare the results to your existing camera.

mattw
mattw  105189 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 5:00 PM

There are lots of reasons why 'anyone' might want a mk1 5D - Its still a fine camera, and still able to produce fantastic images upto ISO 1600.

However, what is your interest in a 5D? If you already have a 7D, I'm not sure the 5d Mk1 is a worthwile 'upgrade'. If you already have a Sigma 10-20mm lens, then you are already well covered for landscapes.

sherlob
sherlob e2 Member 82324 forum postssherlob vcard United Kingdom125 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 5:48 PM


Quote: There are lots of reasons why 'anyone' might want a mk1 5D - Its still a fine camera, and still able to produce fantastic images upto ISO 1600.

However, what is your interest in a 5D? If you already have a 7D, I'm not sure the 5d Mk1 is a worthwile 'upgrade'. If you already have a Sigma 10-20mm lens, then you are already well covered for landscapes.

Ditto

Overread
Overread  63762 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 6:18 PM

At the moment I've no firm ideas if I do or don't want a 5D - the price on it is lowering somewhat to the 500 area and the fact that I hear a lot of good things about 35mm means I'm curious to see this wonderment over the 1.6crop.
However I also respect that macro, wildlife and occasional landscapes mixed with reduced indoor shooting means that many of the advantages of the fullframe over the crop sensor are either moot or lesser in importance.

Thus far the option to shoot wide open on macro for even less depth of field and the ability to use longer telephoto lenses indoors (because of the wider angle of view) and thus negate distortion as compared to using shorter lenses on the 1.6crop bodies. Those are the two primary reasons I can see for advantages of the 5D over the 7D - esp since the high ISO performance of both is fairly similar.


The other option is to forget the 5D and go for a 35mm film camera in the same price range; bonus there would be a higher build quality and improved AF over what the 5D has - downside is being film (an unfamiliar area for me); reduced effective fps (yes you can shoot fast but you dont' really want to get 10 frames all the same when you've only 35 to a roll); costs of shooting and processing film; reduced usable ISO/ASA range unless I start hunting for much higher ASA/ISO films than are commonly used.

Snapper
Snapper  93750 forum posts United States Minor Outlying Islands3 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 7:07 PM


Quote:
So convince me - I've yet to really work out the reason for wanting a 5D if there is one at all.

You've got it in one. There's so much chat on here about gear that folks end up believing they might want something but they don't really know why. The worst thing you can then do is to ask others why you should buy one! If you really can't think of a reason why you would need one, just forget all about it and buy another lens or something for your existing camera. My position is actually the opposite of yours as I can't see why I would need to update my 5D as it can easily outperform my humble abilities, I don't shoot sports and I don't shoot black cats in coal cellars either. Wink

Last Modified By Snapper at 29 Mar 2012 - 7:08 PM
Phoenix
Phoenix  131876 forum posts
29 Mar 2012 - 7:54 PM

For me, my 5d does everything I require of it and provides big enough files for the image quality I desire, I'm not really interested in the "bells & whistles" added to the more recent models (Video & Liveview) and if I bought a newer model, I would have to replace my RAW Convertor of choice as it isn't compatible with the RAW files from the newer models.

Given the choice, I'd go for a 5D every time

Overread
Overread  63762 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
29 Mar 2012 - 7:55 PM

Very true Snapper, though by asking others to justify I at least get to avoid the "I told you so" comments that come after not getting one Wink

I've also always been interested in furthering my understanding in things; if I had the funds the 5DMIII would be a more attractive purchase, but with its high costs I've just no justification at all to purchase one (esp as its AF is only catching up with the 7D). I think, for me, a 5D would be more an exploration into the 35mm world (which is why I've also considered film) and into seeing if there would be any purpose in investing heavier into 35mm sensors as opposed to 1.6 or 1.3 (1DMIV would, from the current market, be the most likely highest end camera I would opt to purchase)

Last Modified By Overread at 29 Mar 2012 - 8:00 PM
JackAllTog
JackAllTog e2 Member 53617 forum postsJackAllTog vcard United Kingdom58 Constructive Critique Points
30 Mar 2012 - 11:40 AM

The only definite reason i can think of is depth of feild - a bigger sensor inherently has less depth of feild so if you have a nifty 50 f1.8 and like shooting wide open for shallow DOF then this would be good.

The negative reasons for FF will be whether you have enough EF (not EFs) lenses to use with it?

If i had a spare 500 i'd get a light meter and a 2nd studiolight/speedlite

MeanGreeny
30 Mar 2012 - 11:58 AM

I can't imagine why people would think that, just because it's 7 years old it's a bad camera.

Let's face it. Most digital cameras available for the last 5-10 years are waaaaaaay more capable of producing a decent image than the idiot stood behind them Smile

photofrenzy
30 Mar 2012 - 1:28 PM

just because new models are released, That doesnt make the older model a bad one the Canon 5D 12 mp is a good camera and still is and allways will be. It produces superb quality and is actualy quite popular with Landscapers as well as the 5D mk2 . I still have a Nikon D3 absolutely amazing camera Still is a great camera. Read the reviews of the 5D it produces superb images, So why wouldnt it still produce superb images it is what it is a Great camera Tongue

G6DDS
G6DDS e2 Member 5231 forum postsG6DDS vcard Scotland
30 Mar 2012 - 5:32 PM

I just bought a 5d mk1 last month, 5k actuatuions for 500 was a no brainer. Always wanted to go full frame but never fancied all the bells and whistles of the mk2 or3.
Much nicer images and great DOF compared to my 40D.

Phoenix
Phoenix  131876 forum posts
2 Apr 2012 - 6:55 PM

The other reason I'd always choose a 5D or other Full Frame sensor is coming from a 35mm film background, I prefer to look at a scene, think "Hmmm, that'll need a 24mm" and put the appropriate lens on rather than look at a scene, think "Hmmm, that'll need a 24mm, now what would that be on my cropped sensor ?", and then stand doing mental aritmatic whilst the light changes and I miss the shot

Cagey75
Cagey75  342 forum posts Ireland
2 Apr 2012 - 9:29 PM

No matter the camera, it will still produce the same quality images now, as it did when it was the new kid on the block. Unless it has deteriorated from over or mis-use. There will always be something new, in a few years time the MKIII will be considered old, and the same question will be asked of it.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.