The 10 Most Important Canon EOS Digital Cameras of All-Time

[Old Man FL/FD]

My first DSLR was the 10D in 2003. I was using a PowerShot S50 at the time. The purchase receipt of my ‘kit’ walking out of the camera store is attached.

I then upgraded to a 1D MkII in 2005. A photo of my kit back then, taken on my S50, is attached. Pretty decent for a 20 year old image. The EXIF data from that image is also attached.

In 2017, I upgraded to a 1DX MkII. APS-C to APS-H to Full Frame – never going back!

I plan on upgrading next to a R1 MkII when it comes out in two years.

A couple comments:

Note in 2003, a 128MB CF card was $70 USD!

My EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L lens I sold to KEH in 2022 for $565 USD. It retained 47% of its original cost (in constant USD) 19 years later!

 

[P-visie]

My list of the most influential EOS digital camera’s:

1. 10D - my first digital camera. I bought mine in May 2003. The store asked me if I was on the waiting list, I said Yes and skipped a very long list. I quickly sold my EOS 3 and EOS 5 camera’s after I got the 10D.
2. 5D - first ‘affordable’ full frame, 5D Mk III, first Canon consumer DSLR with good AF, 5D Mk IV for the improvements in DR and noise performance.
3. 5Ds R - I’ve made some of my best landscape pictures with it.
4. 1D Mk IV - built like a tank and the APS-H crop factor was a good compromise between FF and APS-C.
5. R5 - The (eye) AF is so good it felt like cheating when photographing birds in flight for the first time with it.

 

[P-visie]

Note in 2003, a 128MB CF card was $70 USD!

I paid 300+ Euro’s for a 1 GB CF card in July 2003.

 

[Keithf2.8is]

Great article! I'd like to point out one correction though, the EOS 10D was announced in February 2003 and started shipping in March 2003. When I shot film I was on the Nikon system(N90 & F100), then switched to Canon when I went digital in December 2003, with the 10D.

I captured my first event, a nordic race in Ketchum, Idaho, in Feb 2004, with the EOS 10D. A 1GB card back then cost $220(YIKES!!). I liked the camera so much I bought a second one a few months later. Since then I've owned(always in pairs except for*), 20D, 30D, 40D, 7DM2, *1DX, *1DXM2, *R6, *R6M2. I didn't use the R6 bodies long before upgrading to the R3. Which, I'm currently using a pair of. I've always use 2 cameras when capturing events. I also still have a 40D and 7DM2, but that one is listed on Gear Focus.

 

[Sporgon]

The big issue was the strange noise in shadows, and I'm not talking about underexposing, at higher ISO it fell off a cliff.

Fun thread

Most of my use of the 5DS has been landscape, but I did use them at relatively high iso - 1600 to 3200 - when shooting weddings, necessary for dim British churches in dim British light ! Can’t say I found anything that I’d call ‘strange noise in the shadows’ or at least no more strange than other cameras of that era. From my experience it was substantially better than the 5Diii at those ISOs, especially so when reduced to that camera’s output size. I think sharpening can be the enemy of the 5DS due to emphasising the increased photon noise, and as such I only ever sharpen midtones, avoiding shadows and skies in an image.
Just on a side note, I contemplated a Sony A7S and adapting my Canon lenses for using in dimly lit churches, but found that after reducing the output of the 5DS down the 12mp (and avoiding sharpening) there wasn’t enough difference to make it worthwhile, for me at any rate.

Agree - fun thread !

 

[Bob Howland]

I have never used my 5Ds at 12MP but I have used it JPEG at 22MP, the same resolution as the 5D3, several times. The highest "normal" ISO for a 5Dx is 6400 and I don't use it above 3200. Interestingly, the Nikon D8 and D9 resolution can be reduced to 2425.56MP and 14.83MP. I wonder how many sports photographers and photojournalists use it at those resolutions.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I've owned 5 of your top 10: 300D; R5; 70D; 7Dii; EOS M; and the Dishonourable Mentioned 5DSr. And, I still have the 300D alongside my R5ii, R5 and R7. If I had to keep one MILC and one DSLR it would be the R5ii and the 5DSr. Once I got the 5DSr, I sold my 7Dii and 5Div. The 5DSr gave by far the best IQ, outresolved the 7Dii and had better AF than it, albeit not its burst rate. I've had some of my best bird shots, including BIF with it as well as landscapes. It took the R5 for me to sell it. Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

View attachment 227521

Woow! Great pic and an excellent job of catching the exact moment!

 

[AlanF]

Most of my use of the 5DS has been landscape, but I did use them at relatively high iso - 1600 to 3200 - when shooting weddings, necessary for dim British churches in dim British light ! Can’t say I found anything that I’d call ‘strange noise in the shadows’ or at least no more strange than other cameras of that era. From my experience it was substantially better than the 5Diii at those ISOs, especially so when reduced to that camera’s output size. I think sharpening can be the enemy of the 5DS due to emphasising the increased photon noise, and as such I only ever sharpen midtones, avoiding shadows and skies in an image.
Just on a side note, I contemplated a Sony A7S and adapting my Canon lenses for using in dimly lit churches, but found that after reducing the output of the 5DS down the 12mp (and avoiding sharpening) there wasn’t enough difference to make it worthwhile, for me at any rate.

Agree - fun thread !

My wife and I took photos of a Bell Bird hidden under a green canopy in New Zealand, in miserable green light. I used the 5Div with the the EF 400mm DO ii at iso 12800 and pushed through 0.5 stops in post. She, at a lower shutter speed, shot with the 5DSr and EF 100-400mm ii from the opposite side at iso 6,400 pushed through 1.5 stops (both equivalent to iso 18,000). (5DIV, top, 5DSr below, both processed with DxO PL6, with no added noise suppression). I think the 5DSr performed as well as the 5Div at very low light.

 

[Sporgon]

My wife and I took photos of a Bell Bird hidden under a green canopy in New Zealand, in miserable green light. I used the 5Div with the the EF 400mm DO ii at iso 12800 and pushed through 0.5 stops in post. She, at a lower shutter speed, shot with the 5DSr and EF 100-400mm ii from the opposite side at iso 6,400 pushed through 1.5 stops (both equivalent to iso 18,000). (5DIV, top, 5DSr below, both processed with DxO PL6, with no added noise suppression). I think the 5DSr performed as well as the 5Div at very low light.


View attachment 227556View attachment 227557

Good heavens, that’s remarkable ! Just shows what knowing your equipment and processing techniques can do.
I was at a wedding around 2017 where the photographer was using both 5Div and 5DSr. She told me she preferred the output from the 5Diiisr, as she called it.

 

[Mxw.be]

My path so far: 550d > 77d > 90d

Planning to switch to an r7 and c70 in the future.

 

[Tom Helmut Rathke]

I've owned 5 of your top 10: 300D; R5; 70D; 7Dii; EOS M; and the Dishonourable Mentioned 5DSr. And, I still have the 300D alongside my R5ii, R5 and R7. If I had to keep one MILC and one DSLR it would be the R5ii and the 5DSr. Once I got the 5DSr, I sold my 7Dii and 5Div. The 5DSr gave by far the best IQ, outresolved the 7Dii and had better AF than it, albeit not its burst rate. I've had some of my best bird shots, including BIF with it as well as landscapes. It took the R5 for me to sell it. Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

View attachment 227521

That's a wonderful shot! I loved my 5Ds. However, I traded it in for the R52 and never looked back.

 

[clarus]

I would swap 40D and R1 out for R6 and M50. M50 is showing Canon can make a well spec&relatively cheap mirrorless.

I really second that. The R6 was what started my journey into photography. I remember I evaluated all the bodies for weeks - Nikon, Panasonic, Canon. (No Sony because after so many Sony products I realised they can't do software and GUIs, period.) The R6 was the ticket to all my use cases including family memories, travel, birding. It never let me down. It had the best AF back then and it is still a body I grab occasionally and enjoy every second of it.
I think the R6 was a crucially important body for Canon at that time.

 

[AlanF]

That's a wonderful shot! I loved my 5Ds. However, I traded it in for the R52 and never looked back.

I traded mine for an R5 back in September 2020. The R5 was the breakthrough body for Canon as it could take on Sony head to head for AF and tracking and beat it in for animal/bird recognition. I still have it alongside the R5ii. However, the images from my 5DSr are as good as get from the R5 under suitable conditions.

 

[Hector1970]

Interesting list of cameras. Mine would be different. I thought the 5DIII was a great step forward. It was a very decent camera. Very reliable with great image quality for its time. I still have a 5DSR and it’s a great studio camera and landscape camera on a tripod at low ISO. R5 is a brilliant camera still.
Cameras I didn’t like were 7DII. I may have had a bad copy but it was always slightly substandard. 1DX mark III was just not worth the purchase. It didn’t have enough improvements over version II and for me too low MP. Should have been 30MP. Too heavy to be worthwhile. Mirrorless passed it out quickly in terms of FPS and tracking focus. An expensive paperweight - handy for bad weather.

 

[Birdshooter]

This article is funny to me, as you can see the people that did not shoot the pro line up of Canon cameras.

I went 30D to 40D (great camera) then switched to pro bodies. I started with the 1D Mark III which to me had issues, then to the 1D Mark IV which was a great camera. I never had the urge for a 5D series as I was a bird shooter and wanted the speed of the pro bodies over the more megapixels as my aim was always birds in flight.

The pro bodies came out every four years for the Olympics and you could get easily sell them used for about 1/2 of what you paid for them. The other thing with buying pro bodies is that you bought the best auto focusing cameras on the market. Canon Sony NIkon, always puts the best auto focus in the pro line ups.

I do remember the 7DII launch and people referring them as a baby 1Dx, but that was not true in my eyes. The 1Dx when it came out was a fantastic camera, it had superb auto focus and image quality. People where hesitant to buy them as we lost that nice 1.3 crop which took away the vignetting of the big whites when shooting at F4, Also the 600mm IS II was introduced at the same time and people were buying the new lens over the 1Dx. I will never forget post a white winged Scotter on Nature Scapes and people saying "look how sharp that eye is" and then people I know started buying the 1Dx. Losing that crop was hard to swallow, but full frame had its advantages.

The follow up which is also not mentioned the 1Dx Mark II was a great camera as well. When the R came out I bought one to test out the new mirrorless line and fell in love with the features it brought with it little did I know about rolling shutters at the time. Then I bought the R5 and had a love hate relationship with it due to the rolling shutter and how many images I missed with the camera. So many missed images. I waited ten years for the opertunity to get a bird that was a nemisis bird only to have it fly right past me and the R5 could not lock onto it in good light. I almost tossed the camera into the marsh that day, and the next day was looking to buy the R3.

On to the R3 to replace the R5 and was super happy again as the auto focus of the R3 is superb. It could find birds (warblers) in the canopy above you where the R5 struggled. Then a friend bought the R5II and urged me on to get one. The R5II is so good I don't look at replacing it or the R3 for some time.

Nice to look back at all the great cameras that Canon has made over the years. I never had the urge to switch to zony liike so many people I know did when mirrorless cameras first came out and Canon was trying to catch up, and boy oh boy did we catch up and surpass many.

Funny that at one time ISO 1600 was pushing a camera to its limits. Now we can shoot at crazy high iso's and still produce great imagery.

Thanks for the walk down memory lane, Richard and eveyone that has posted.

My only regret as I age is that Canon has not produced any long glass like Nikon has. Some affordable light weight long glass is something I have dreamed of since the days when Canon was experimenting with "DO" lenses. And all he years later we still don't have F5.6 or 6.3 long glass. Maybe a switch to the dark side is still a glimmer for me. lol

Cheers!

 

[Birdshooter]

My wife and I took photos of a Bell Bird hidden under a green canopy in New Zealand, in miserable green light. I used the 5Div with the the EF 400mm DO ii at iso 12800 and pushed through 0.5 stops in post. She, at a lower shutter speed, shot with the 5DSr and EF 100-400mm ii from the opposite side at iso 6,400 pushed through 1.5 stops (both equivalent to iso 18,000). (5DIV, top, 5DSr below, both processed with DxO PL6, with no added noise suppression). I think the 5DSr performed as well as the 5Div at very low light.


View attachment 227556View attachment 227557

The 5dsr had great image quality, Maybe a new 100 megapixel R5dsr will come along one day.

 

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

People don't use the pro bodies as much also for the size, even if you can buy them used at a great price the 5 series will always be the reference for what most people can carry around.