a used Canon 5D, a budget way to go full frame?

billnelson75

I'm New Here
Nov 5, 2012
21
0
Thanks for the input everyone. I was able to pickup a very nice used 5d on ebay for $585. The prices vary pretty widely on ebay, but I think right around $600 is the most common range. I've only had it for a week, but its already pretty evident that it blows my t3 out of the water for portraits. The shallow DOF and bokeh is great, and while I wasn't super happy with the t3 even at low ISO's, this seems to be much better at 400 ISO than my t3. I haven't had a reason to use much higher than that so far. I will probably upgrade to a "newer" FF at some point, but I don't think I can go wrong with what I spent, and the quality of the photos are great. If you can grab a nice condition 5d, I think it is something to consider if you are using an older rebel and you want to go FF.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,476
952

RLPhoto

Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Mar 27, 2012
3,778
0
San Antonio, TX
www.Ramonlperez.com
dtaylor said:
RLPhoto said:
Disagree. I've already had this discussion here.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9773.msg176369#msg176369

I could never get as clean ISO-3200 Shots w/o serious NR out of my 7D.
Then you weren't doing proper comparisons. Review controlled tests and noise measurements. The 5Dc is not better than the 7D at 3200.

I could only dream of this on my 7D.
I see it all the time.
Sorry if I don't shoot shoot test chart but in real world use the 5Dc is better than the 7D.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,476
952
RLPhoto said:
Sorry if I don't shoot shoot test chart but in real world use the 5Dc is better than the 7D.
No it's not. We're not discussing opinion here. Noise levels are objective, testable reality. The 7D tests lower across the board (chroma, black, grey). This doesn't magically change with a "real world" scene.

The chroma noise difference in particular is human observable in print where the 7D clearly looks better.
 

RLPhoto

Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Mar 27, 2012
3,778
0
San Antonio, TX
www.Ramonlperez.com
dtaylor said:
RLPhoto said:
Sorry if I don't shoot shoot test chart but in real world use the 5Dc is better than the 7D.
No it's not. We're not discussing opinion here. Noise levels are objective, testable reality. The 7D tests lower across the board (chroma, black, grey). This doesn't magically change with a "real world" scene.

The chroma noise difference in particular is human observable in print where the 7D clearly looks better.
Show me some of your ISO 3200 Shots from both cameras. I've owned both before and the 5Dc has better ISO performance.
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
At Building PAnoramics we use 5D mark I and ii. We certainly won't stop using the Mk I untill it's worn out ! In practical terms IQ is great up to ISO 800, then it drops off a cliff. Both Mk I and ii are more at home shooting things that only move real slow...........
In practice the more modern aps-c cameras have caught up in IQ, but.......but.... There is something about the Mk I images, it's like the difference between a high quality zoom and a prime, sometimes the prime just produces that luminosity that lifts the picture. As for 12 bit vs 14, our Mk I images have just as much colour depth as the Mk ii, if not more, although I will agree that Mk ii data stands up to more pp manipulation.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,476
952
RLPhoto said:
Show me some of your ISO 3200 Shots from both cameras. I've owned both before and the 5Dc has better ISO performance.
No. You show hard evidence that the reproducible tests available at sites like DPReview and IR are wrong. I'm not the one waving my hand at and dismissing hard data. You are. Back it up or shut up.

And it better be perfect...and reproducible...right down to the last parameter. Not different subjects, lighting, and exposure, shot on the fly at different times and places, then compared, probably at the wrong magnification (i.e. 100% for both meaning the 7D file is inspected more closely), which is typical of people making claims that go against reality.

And don't reply with 36 point type like some child.
 
Ooooh, Ooooh! I want to get in the fight!

From my personal experience, the 5D has better image quality than my T2i(which has the same sensor as a 7D), especially at higher ISOs. Also, I don't think anyone should be shooting either sensor at higher than 1600, because they both look like uber crap beyond that.

The 5D and 7D have similar noise levels, but the 5D is ever so slightly better, and for some reason seems to retain more detail. The noise has a different character.

As far as it being quantifiable, when I look at comparisons online, they all seem to agree with the above, so I'm not sure where dtaylor is getting his info.

Check out DxO marks comparison. I know their overall ratings are meaningless, because no one can figure how on God's green earth they justify the weighting, but I think their testing is consistent for the individual tests and therefore, acceptable for comparison.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/645%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/619%7C0/(brand2)/Canon/(appareil3)/176%7C0/(brand3)/Canon

The 5D only loses in the dynamic range department at low ISO. And it's better than the 7D at ISO 800 and up.

Have a nice day everyone.
 

RLPhoto

Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Mar 27, 2012
3,778
0
San Antonio, TX
www.Ramonlperez.com
dtaylor said:
RLPhoto said:
Show me some of your ISO 3200 Shots from both cameras. I've owned both before and the 5Dc has better ISO performance.
No. You show hard evidence that the reproducible tests available at sites like DPReview and IR are wrong. I'm not the one waving my hand at and dismissing hard data. You are. Back it up or shut up.

And it better be perfect...and reproducible...right down to the last parameter. Not different subjects, lighting, and exposure, shot on the fly at different times and places, then compared, probably at the wrong magnification (i.e. 100% for both meaning the 7D file is inspected more closely), which is typical of people making claims that go against reality.

And don't reply with 36 point type like some child.
I made a statement, You said I'm wrong. The burden of proof is on you.

I've provided many, many samples of the 5Dc's superb IQ. You have provided none.
 
Aug 5, 2012
244
0
www.facebook.com
I can attest to the 5Dc having nicer looking images at ISO 3200 compared to 7D. I've owned both extensively as well. Yes, in charts and 100% crops the 7D looks competitive, but in real world use the 5D images look so much better because of the huge pixel size. It might depend on the situation as well. But I take photos of people at events and I'd never use 3200 on a 7D at a wedding but I'd sure as hell use it on a 5d.
 

RustyTheGeek

EOR R
Apr 27, 2011
1,634
4
54
DFW
rustythegeek.zenfolio.com
A 5Dc for $600 is a steal, and a 5D2 for twice that is also a great deal. My experience with the 5Dc has been very positive. Love the images, love the simplicity of the camera and I love the Full Frame format. I think it works great in low light but I rarely go over 1600. Then use Lightroom to tweak the images a bit if you like. Yes, dust on the sensor can be an issue but I don't see how that is the fault of the camera. I would suggest anyone pick up an inexpensive used 5Dc to get into Full Frame.

5Dc Bottom Line: Pair the 5Dc with a used 40D and you have a great one-two punch to get width and reach for $1000 or less. And they share the same battery. I for one like the 5Dc in low light. Images require a little help in Lightroom but that's OK for me.

5D2 Bottom Line: Ditto for the 5D2, it's a great camera, most that have owned it loved it and so get a 5D2 + 60D for another great combo for less than $2500 that share the same battery and both have movie mode.

5D3 Bottom Line: Since using a new 5D3 and comparing it to the classic 5Dc, I'm not super over the top overwhelmed with the 5D3. It's a great camera but for $3000+ I'm not quite as wow'd as I thought I would be. The 5D3 is wonderful for those that need/love it but I will definitely be buying a 6D to compare and possibly selling the 5D3 if I can. At the end of the day, I'm still clicking the shutter and after that it's just more money spent on the equipment to do that. I would rather have another lens or two if I can make a 6D work as my new camera.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,638
827
dtaylor said:
RLPhoto said:
Sorry if I don't shoot shoot test chart but in real world use the 5Dc is better than the 7D.
No it's not. We're not discussing opinion here. Noise levels are objective, testable reality. The 7D tests lower across the board (chroma, black, grey). This doesn't magically change with a "real world" scene.

The chroma noise difference in particular is human observable in print where the 7D clearly looks better.
Where does your information come from? I've had both and the 5DC is easily better. The 7D looks horrible at or above ISO 800.
From the tests I've seen, the 5D C beats out the 7D on s/n ratio handily. What reliable testing do you have to show us.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/619%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/176%7C0/(brand2)/Canon
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,476
952
RLPhoto said:
I made a statement, You said I'm wrong. The burden of proof is on you.

I've provided many, many samples of the 5Dc's superb IQ. You have provided none.
You haven't provided a single sample for comparison. Nor could you provide one on request here, even though you claim to have handled both.

Your statement claims the opposite of published, professional test data and sample images (DPReview; Imaging Resource). Therefore the burden of proof is entirely on you.

But go ahead and rant in 36 point again like a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,476
952
Mt Spokane Photography said:
dtaylor said:
No it's not. We're not discussing opinion here. Noise levels are objective, testable reality. The 7D tests lower across the board (chroma, black, grey). This doesn't magically change with a "real world" scene.

The chroma noise difference in particular is human observable in print where the 7D clearly looks better.
Where does your information come from?
Controlled, published tests by reputable sites like DPReview and Imaging Resource. My personal experience concurs fully.

I've had both and the 5DC is easily better.
Then it should be easy for you to provide test samples to prove the point. Have any? (I won't hold my breath.)

The 7D looks horrible at or above ISO 800.
That makes me think you've never shot one.

What reliable testing do you have to show us.
It's ironic you asked that just before posting DxO links. DxO is not a reliable or reputable site. The errors in their testing have been discussed many times here and on other forums. That they do not produce accurate results is self evident from their more absurd claims (i.e. greater RAW DR than bit depth; APS-C consumer cameras superior to medium format digital backs).

I'll say it again:

* Controlled tests by reputable sites like DPReview and Imaging Resource show the 7D to be better in IQ across the board than the 5Dc. In a lot of cases the differences are too small to matter in print, but the 7D measures better at high ISO and the chroma difference is human observable.

* Because this particular issue is one of objective, testable reality, personal opinions don't mean squat unless and until you can provide controlled test samples...including RAW files...which show something other than the test samples that are published.

Sorry to be such a hard a**, but I hate mushy thinking. And FF fans are full of mushy thinking when it comes to this particular comparison.
 

RLPhoto

Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Mar 27, 2012
3,778
0
San Antonio, TX
www.Ramonlperez.com
dtaylor said:
RLPhoto said:
I made a statement, You said I'm wrong. The burden of proof is on you.

I've provided many, many samples of the 5Dc's superb IQ. You have provided none.
You haven't provided a single sample for comparison. Nor could you provide one on request here, even though you claim to have handled both.

Your statement claims the opposite of published, professional test data and sample images (DPReview; Imaging Resource). Therefore the burden of proof is entirely on you.

But go ahead and rant in 36 point again like a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum.
[size=24pt]Your plainly mistaken Mr. Taylor. I was a Avid 5Dc + 7D combo user.[/size]

1. http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9773.45

2. http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/34906285033/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-2-50mm-1-2l-review

3. http://images.us.viewbook.com/9a8bb8062cdfc9b86e057b85a601e742.jpg

Since I don't shoot test charts and my experience is real world, If you don't get what not only myself have been saying but other 5Dc users have also agreed on. There is no helping you.

Please, I would love to see some of your ISO 3200 Shots from the 7D, Because I already know what they're going to look like.