real-world autofocus on 5d2

[michi]

I have a 7D and a 5DII. The 5DII center auto focus is just fine. Never had any issues in real life. I don't understand the negative hype either. At the price it's now, I think the 5DII is a fantastic camera.

 

[wickidwombat]

Thanks for the info............right now I use focus and recompose all the time with the 50d, and have no complaints. I realize that the 5d2 and 3 are completely different, I guess I am mainly wondering if in going from 50d to 5d2 for the kind of use it will get makes sense,.........looking like it probably does...

your shooting style wont change then with the 5dmk2 then the center point is actually really good, basically treat it as if it has 1 AF point and its gold. also AI servo tracking is bad even with the center point i constantly switches between the subject and the background you can get sharp shots if you pick and time them as the subject comes into focus

 

[The Bad Duck]

Live view is exceptional on the 5dII, there is no reason to pass based on shallow depth of field.

You are right and Live view has saved quite a few shots. It is more usefull than I expected when I got the mkII. But most of the time live view is too slow and/or I have to look in the display making the camera less steady resulting in motion blur instead. A tripod is not a good idea on a dancefloor for instance.

 

[LightCrafterPhotography]

I have the Mark II and don't plan on selling it. I don't yet have the Mark III but will likely pick one up in the future.

I have no issues with the 5D Mark II's autofocus capability and isn't quite sure what all the complains regarding its AF are about. While I don't yet have the Mark III to make comparisons, everything that I have read has unanimously agreed and praised its vastly improved AF system. It's a major selling point for many that have upgraded. However, my Mark II continues to deliver beautiful, crisp images for me. I use center point focusing with back focusing to recompose and the technique is simple and natural.

Blurred images I have seen are generally a result of my incorrect settings – too low an ISO setting in dimlight which is easily fixed by pushing up the ISO to get a faster shutter speed for handholding. I rarely get blurred images. Most would fall in user's error and not in the fault of the camera. In my opinion, unless you're a professional pushing the limits shooting fast action or extreme lowlight, the Mark II is plenty of camera that can handle most situations. I've seen amazing images shot with the Mark II and even from the Rebel line and equally have seen bad images shot with the Mark III or 1D-X. In the end, I think it's really the skills of the photographer and rarely the fault of the camera. Sure, having the Mark III, a 1D-X or even a D800 certainly helps, but I also think exercising better shooting/focusing techniques will also vastly improve the final results of an image using any camera.

I'm with you on this.