Amazon Kindle Unlimited Offer: 1-Month For FREE!
Canon EOS 5MKII
Hi David. The trouble with your question is that owners of the Mk2 will undoubtably praise the images from the camera. (Me included)
There are a variety of reviews on the Web and I would encourage anyone thinking of upgrading to spend a bit of time reading them. As you have commented on the two lenses in your post you will no doubt realise that to produce the the quality images from the FF camera you do need quality glass. I can't speak for the 100-400L but the results from the 24-105 are significantly better than my previous 30D with EFS lenses. - John
There are a variety of reviews on the Web and I would encourage anyone thinking of upgrading to spend a bit of time reading them. As you have commented on the two lenses in your post you will no doubt realise that to produce the the quality images from the FF camera you do need quality glass. I can't speak for the 100-400L but the results from the 24-105 are significantly better than my previous 30D with EFS lenses. - John
It's not about those lenses in particular, but this thread may be worth reading.
I'm still not sure either way with mine - the images always seem to look 'fuzzy' when viewed at 100% but when printed they look great, so maybe it's just me pixel peeping too much
I think as you add more pixels you should expect 100% views to get progressively softer (without extra sharpening), just because you are placing even higher demands of sharpness on the lenses. I think the 100% monitor view is the path to digital hell and the tortured souls end up on DPREVIEW scrutinising images for subtle defects 
So it is probably fairer to judge the camera on print output that on the LCD screen.
So it is probably fairer to judge the camera on print output that on the LCD screen.
I'd agree with that. 100% is too far away from the final print resolution to give a reasonable guide to what's visible in print, whereas other zoom values are interpolated too much by the software.
It's time consuming, but there's no substitute for final fine tuning via test prints on your target printer/paper either.
It's time consuming, but there's no substitute for final fine tuning via test prints on your target printer/paper either.
Most of my pics(if not all) look slightly fuzzy at 100% on the computer. At first I thought it was just incredibly poor technique by me(which still can't be ruled out 
), then I thought there might be a problem with my cameras/lenses.
It's re-assuring to hear others experience the same phenomena and exciting to hear that they print out ok
), then I thought there might be a problem with my cameras/lenses. It's re-assuring to hear others experience the same phenomena and exciting to hear that they print out ok
Just looked at a few of mine at 100% and they don't seem fuzzy at all, if anything they are sharper than the shots from the 20D.
Though thinking about it it C1 ids adding some sharpening..so that could be it.
Though thinking about it it C1 ids adding some sharpening..so that could be it.
I suppose it's 'degrees of expectation' ... i.e. what one person thinks is sharp - another may think is soft - and vice versa.
I've tried the micro adjustment and it didn't really do anything.
like I said, at print sizes up to A3 the pics look fine, so I think it's just that we start to get too picky at 100%
I've tried the micro adjustment and it didn't really do anything.
like I said, at print sizes up to A3 the pics look fine, so I think it's just that we start to get too picky at 100%
I just bought the Canon 5d MarkII and I am having a ball with the camera.. At this time is it still a learning cruve but I have found no problems with the camera, however I also got the battery grip with the camera but have not been able to get an extra battery for the pack so I have to use 6 AA batteries and have noticed that the camera does tend to eat up the batteries rather fast?
I was in NY City and did find the time to try out the camera !!
http://www.spingolaphotography.com/images/NYNight.jpg
NOW I have greatly reduced this images but this was taken at 20s at f4.0 iso 3200
Vinny
I was in NY City and did find the time to try out the camera !!
http://www.spingolaphotography.com/images/NYNight.jpg
NOW I have greatly reduced this images but this was taken at 20s at f4.0 iso 3200
Vinny
