This camera is extremely lightweight. It weighs just 1. As I mentioned above, it has a full-frame Plus, there's no need to recharge your camera in the middle of a shoot because with its lithium ion battery, the camera stays charged for more than 24 hours at a time. The microphone is located just below the 5D badge, so it can record the best audio sans an external mic of course without interruption from, say, a wandering finger.
The camera features a nice, leather-like grip to ensure you don't accidentally drop it when trying to grab the perfect shot. All of the ports for audio and video are located on the left side of the camera, while the right side is reserved for the card slot.
Overall, this camera's handling is very standard. If there's anything to complain about, it would be that the design is not different enough from other similar cameras. The 3. The The Sony A is an even more formidable opponent. Against such competition the EOS 5D Mk2 may be in for a rougher time than its illustrious predecessor.
The body is almost exactly the same size and shape as the original 5D, measuring x This new battery is significantly more powerful than the mAh pack in the 5D, and has greatly improved cold weather performance. The menu has had a thorough overhaul to improve its appearance, and now includes an on-screen quick menu similar to those used by Sony and Olympus, navigated via the small joystick control to the right of the screen.
Although this does provide quick access to all the main shooting functions, the control logic is a bit counter-intuitive at times. In the Sony and Olympus menus, the D-pad can be used to make adjustments as well as selections. Movie clips are recorded in the Quicktime.
A freshly-formatted 2GB card only provides enough storage space for 5mins 54 seconds of HD video, so you better place a bulk order now. Video recording operates in live view mode, and it takes a bit of setting up to get it to work. First live view has to be activated in the menu, and then the Live Mode focus has to be selected.
The 5D Mk2 has two autofocus systems. The main one is a fast phase detection system using nine sensors in a diamond pattern, which is used in viewfinder shooting mode, and can also be used in live view mode but requires a mirror-flip to take a focus reading. The Live Mode is a contrast detection system that uses the main imaging sensor, and is quite a lot slower, especially in lower light.
The AF-ON button has to be pressed to focus the camera, and if it is used while shooting the sound of the AF mechanism is clearly audible on the soundtrack, not surprising since the internal microphone is right next to the lens mount. The live view mode itself is better implemented than on some other recent cameras with this feature, with the option to turn off exposure preview simulation.
This is very useful for studio work when using external flash and a tripod, since it allows the user to compose the shot using ambient lighting.
The monitor is the same k 3-inch screen as found on the Nikon D3 and Sony A, but Canon has added a triple-layer anti-glare coating and automatic brightness control, so it is easier to see in bright sunlight. The brightness control can also be set to manual if you need an accurate exposure preview. Other improvements are more subtle. The covers over the various connectors on the left side of the camera body have also been revised and are easier to use, and the connectors in question now include an HDMI socket for connection to a HDTV for still and video playback.
In terms of performance the EOS 5D Mk2 is, as you might expect, enormously impressive, but it is not without its faults. Start-up time is very quick even by DSLR standards, with a delay of less than half a second between switching the camera on and it being able to focus and take a picture. The main nine-point AF system is so quick in good light that it is virtually instant, however it is considerably slower in lower light and I did find it hunting around a bit from time to time in late evening light conditions.
It's such a workhorse of a body that I've been very happy with, and since I don't do a ton of action work I'm not sure if an upgrade to the Mark III or IV would be worth it for me. We have a 5D Mark IV in the office which I get to play with and spoil myself with, but for personal use there's no pressing reason for me to move up.
I even use my original 5D at times just for the fun of it. Sure it's not the same quality as any remotely modern full frame, but it has the experience of handling like a film camera that just so happens to spit out digital files which I rather like when I'm in the mood.
I have to agree regarding the shutter count. My last 5D II body to be added to the kit had 96k on at time of purchase. One of my 6Ds is above k but Canon rates this camera for k actuations. You should be fine ;. Even at what 11 years old the 5D II has plenty of life in it yet for a range of work. Not had a shutter die yet but when it happens I will just get it replaced. Had a Canon 5Ds on order recently but came to my senses and cancelled it. Three 5D II bodies are enough for what I and my clients need right now.
I am looking in to time lapse more myself and am curious as to what your workflow is on that. Possible future article? Yeah I will pop something together. It's a very simple thing to set up. It does rack up the shutter count though. The studio I work still has one Mk II. Not that we love it somehow, the studio owners are cheapskates that run everything into the ground, and this one has miraculously survived. We make do with them. Still, it churns on until death doth part. In each case all that happened was colorspace got jumbled around, but the cameras reacted the same way.
I've never seen anything like it actually. Wood records red hot, and the cameras have the strange phenomenon of imposing a color cast, per image, based on the predominant color in the image.
Prints and artwork are a nightmare. I wound up convincing the company to get a Nikon to shoot prints and artwork, because that was requiring massive retouching re; time.
We ran some tests with Nikon, Sony Olympus, and Panasonic cameras and none of them exhibited any excessive color problems Nikon and Olympus were the most accurate. They worked right out of the gate. I suspect how Canon's "color science" are popular for "skin tones" is the reason behind what we're seeing. The cameras are great for wedding, fashion, portrait, and non color critical stuff like sports and live events like concerts and such.
They're well made, robust and reliable machine for sure. The 5dII was the worst camera i have every used the focus was shocking! I have heard a lot of complaints about AF, but with all of the bodies I have used I've never had an issue. I wince every time I think of the 5D2. As a Canon shooter, that was the last of the truly Oh-Wow moment of my brand -- the camera everyone was talking about, and coveting. Yeah it was a major jump in the world of digital. I think the 5Ds is the next landmark camera, but it's not that much of a leap.
It was defective out of the box focusing issues and Canon wouldn't fix it. So much so that the Camera store I bought it from was so embarrassed by Canon's actions he let me swap to Nikon straight up 3 months after purchase.
I might be hated for saying this here and don't want to rain on anyone's parade. I had the original 5D but when the mark II came out I absolutely despised it.
While I agree they are workhorses, it's not my cup of tea. And I admire anyone that can take amazing pictures with this camera but all it did to ma was made me switch to a different system.
I think you might have the numbers mixed up. At any point I could have upgraded, but with the use I give cameras, they would all need repairs eventually to. But, with all of these things its a risk. My 5D Mark II was a real workhorse for 8 years, until a light snowfall got some moisture inside the electronics and left me with a delightful paperweight.
I upgraded to the 5D Mark IV, and love it. Yeah, the 5D2 was a ground-breaking camera in that it was the first DSLR to offer p video, but that was about it. Everything else about it was a severely held-back version of a 1-series camera, from the Rebel-like AF system, frame rate and other speed-related features, to the image quality that proved to be the tip of the iceberg for Canon hitting a brick wall in terms of base ISO dynamic range.
The thing that solidified my distaste for Canon's business model was an ad that I saw in a magazine: in quite a few issues they ran an ad for the 5D2 which had a fisheye shot of a gorgeous Hawaiian sunset, with amazing dynamic range, and whatever tag line Canon thought was smart about the 5-series' newfound resolution boost.
After all, it was a lot like the 1Ds3 sensor, so it had to be good, right? Unfortunately, a few issues later, I saw a tutorial article published by the Canon-sponsored landscape photographer who had actually made that image. I kid you not. This actually happened. If you want to I'm sure you can look it up; it was in Outdoor Photographer Magazine around the time the 5D2 was released, within the first year or so.
Yeah, it was a ground-breaking camera. It was also a dark mark in Canon's history that they should be ashamed of. Yeah I dreamed of owning a few 1DSmk3 bodies, but for the higher specs, the price just wasn't justifiable. I love these work-focused, long-term field reviews. They are so interesting and useful. The only problem is that you have to wait 3 to 6 years for them. They should be dripping through over the next few weeks. Bravo, Great article I now have the 5DSR which to me is the next logical step up as long you are not doing sports or heavy nature work.
I still carry my trusty 5D MKII as backup and for "junking around" like out on my boat because I don't care if it gets wet.
0コメント