Canon EOS 5D Mark II update in eight months ??

[Ruahrc]

Part of the issue is that Canon forces those who need a high megapixel sensor and great autofocusing to choose between the 7D (a crop camera), the 1D Mark IV (much more expensive than the 5D Mark II and another crop camera) and the 1Ds Mark III (ridiculously overpriced, given its age).

Is it any better elsewhere? The D3x is the only choice for a "high MP" Nikon body, and it's 8k.

People who need "high MP" and "fast AF" are shooting on the very forefront of camera technology, and it is not unreasonable to expect that they need to pay a substantial premium for that ability. People who don't "need" it but want it, should also be expected to pay up for the luxury.

Simply put, seems as if everyone wants an ultra high MP camera with ultra fast AF but don't want to pay the ultra high price.

 

[igmolinav]

Hi,

Thank you for your messages : ) !!!

I need a full format camera to use with very sharp manual lenses.

I will also use the video capability for small documentaries.

The main reason I may wait for the new camera, is because of the
new added features, but also because of the resell value !!!

The price difference between the two, if bought new, will be perhaps
a couple hundred dolars. If a year later for some reason, one
may need to sell any of the two camera models, the older model may
have to be sold for way less. In spite of the fact, that one could have
bought new any of the two on the same day, the resell value of
the older model will be lower than the value of the newer model.
In comparison, the newer model will retain more value, even if you
initially paid a $200 difference.

Isn't that right? What do you think ??

Thank you, kind regards,

igmolinav : ) !!!

 

[OreoCookie]

@igmolinav
What you're writing doesn't make sense to me: if you need a camera now to make documentaries, you should buy the camera when you need it. Resale value won't be very important if you plan to buy a tool to suit your professional needs. You'll upgrade it only if you need to and if it makes financial sense. Furthermore, if you're intending to use MF lenses most of the time, the autofocus argument is going to be moot.

Regardless of whether people are arguing that the 5D Mark II's AF system is ok or is lacking, most here do expect that the Mark III's AF sensor will be considerably better. If you're doing video, the extra resolution of a potential 28 MP sensor isn't going to help you one iota.

Also, resale value is less of an issue with something you use professionally: of course your resale value drops once a new model is released. But that doesn't mean you have to sell your old equipment and upgrade.

I'm also not sure you need a full format sensor body: the 7D offers more video modes (50 and 60 fps modes, for instance) that the 5D Mark II doesn't have, for instance, so you could use that equally well. It offers a marginally lower MP count and with good lenses, you'll also be able to take great photos.

 

[jbg232]

Part of the issue is that Canon forces those who need a high megapixel sensor and great autofocusing to choose between the 7D (a crop camera), the 1D Mark IV (much more expensive than the 5D Mark II and another crop camera) and the 1Ds Mark III (ridiculously overpriced, given its age).

That's because canon is a company that needs to sell a product. If you really need to do all those things at the same time - fast autofocus/high frame rate + huge high quality sensor then you're looking at a 1Ds and 6-8K out of your pocket. If you can compromise on one of them, you get to choose between the 5d and 7d series and save a ton of money. Unfortunately, this is life given that both the autofocus motor and the sensor are the most expensive parts of the camera to design and manufacture and if you want both, you have to pay for both.

 

[flosseR]

Hi,

Thank you for your messages : ) !!!

I need a full format camera to use with very sharp manual lenses.

I will also use the video capability for small documentaries.

The main reason I may wait for the new camera, is because of the
new added features, but also because of the resell value !!!

The price difference between the two, if bought new, will be perhaps
a couple hundred dolars. If a year later for some reason, one
may need to sell any of the two camera models, the older model may
have to be sold for way less. In spite of the fact, that one could have
bought new any of the two on the same day, the resell value of
the older model will be lower than the value of the newer model.
In comparison, the newer model will retain more value, even if you
initially paid a $200 difference.

Isn't that right? What do you think ??

Thank you, kind regards,

igmolinav : ) !!!

sorry, the point is, if you make documentaries NOW and have a 8 months head starts including time etc. offset THAT cost against the 200 bucks and you have a no-brainer. This looks like you WANT us to tell you to wait because the next great thing is just around the corner.. well it ALWAYS is.
I know people that held off buying a 50D in favor of the 60D. Well guess what now they are contemplating the 7D because the rumored 60d is nowhere near where it was supposed to be in terms of features.

If you need a camera, get the one you can get now. Resell value is the WRONG approach to this because camera bodies are like computers, they loose value regardless of what you do. Lenses, not so much.

I would also like to see your argument about manual lenses. Why do you need a full frame sensor for manual lenses? the 7D can take them just as well.
//f

 

[jbg232]

Also, remember that this is ALL BASED ON RUMORS!!!! What will you do if 8 months roll around and nothing is released? Then you'll be in an even worse situation because you will be that much more assured something will HOPEFULLY be released but not necessarily released and you will have to buy something to make your documentary. Buy a 5D Mark II or 7D now, they are BOTH great cameras.

 

[firestarter]

The 5DII is an amazing camera and I'm really glad I bought mine about 15 months ago. I've taken thousands of images that I'm happy with.

All my lenses are faster than f2.8 and I predominantly use the central autofocus sensor - so I can't say I've ever had a problem with focussing. That said, you really need a 1D or perhaps a 7D if you're shooting sports.

I think Canon could spin out the life of the 5DII another year or two if they wanted. It's still very competitive compared to Nikon (they don't have a competitor) and it's still the best camera for DSLR video (largest sensor, best quality). It's also competative in Canon's own lineup - theres no other camera that you would obviously buy for cost effective landscape and portrait photography.

If canon do bring out a replacement soon, how would it be different?

- Autofocus: As I said, I've not had problems, but Canon could upgrade the AF on this, and some photographers would welcome it. They need to do something just from a marketing point of view to face negative perceptions.

- Resolution: I think the current resolution is pretty ideal given the lenses I have. Canon will need to re-design some of their existing lenses if they want to go higher; wide open I don't think my lenses have much more to give. Canon's 50mm primes are especially poor. I have a 550D as well, and the closer dot pitch on this gives me noticeably less-sharp results than the 5DII.

- Video. The 5DII is the video camera of choice for a lot of movie professionals. To stay competitive it needs: 50/60p, full resolution HDMI out during shooting, headphone out for monitoring, zebra display for exposure, peaking display for focus.

Of all those, I think the video functions are most likely to drive an earlier refresh, as that's where the pain is being felt and where I think the market if the most dynamic at present.

Would I buy now? A year is a long time to wait and there's lots of good photographs to be had. When a new camera is released it often takes 3 to 6 months for the price to stabilise. I think that buying a 5DII now would give you at least a year of great shooting that you couldn't get elsewhere. Unlike any other digital camera I've owned before, the 5DII actually has the resolution and image quality I want, and it delivers the shots I want. I'm not going to be too envious or unhappy when it gets updated!

 

[akdj]

Thanks, Firestarter...for bringing some rationale to the discussion.

Agreed...if you're considering the purchase, now is as good a time as any! I've made more money in the last two years than EVER! In my wife and I's history of our Audio/Video production company. We pay our mortgages with these cameras. I would, after a lot of experience on both cameras (5dII/7d), including 1 series...hazard to guess...if you are having problems capturing excellent pictures with the 5d2, you should truly take a look at your own abilities as a photographer. Not the tool itself. It's hard to remember such a ground breaking camera! The 5d2...both on the still and the motion front, has produced some of the most magnificent images and video/documentary/movies for amateurs and aspiring professionals (without big budgets) in the history of image capturing devices. Granted, the D90 began the trend, but 6 months later...the 5d2 brought the craft to a whole new level.

The support Canon has shown with firmware updates...Wow! When was the last time a company has updated so many features on an existing product? Instead of replacing it with a new camera with the latest features? That's unheard of in this industry. This alone has kept the 5d2 on the cutting edge of technology!

As far as the AF argument...so tired! The only thing the Nikon FanClub brings up continuously...yet the Canon forums, Flikr, SmugMugs, youtubes, and Vimeos of the world continue to bloat themselves with phenomenal and creative imaging from every corner of the globe (done with the 5d2). Keep in mind...a few short years ago, one had to spend huge cash to get anything faster than 5fps with film. Are there quirks about the A/F system? I don't think so...and I shoot with both the 1d and 7d models...I guess I'm used to shooting with it...but my first trip out this summer with my new 70-200v2 was to the Blue Angels and an air show...I shot over 1200 pictures and got some amazing shots! Lots of fast shots that were totally reliant on A/F. Not a load of misses, but a ton of amazing hits. Again...my thoughts of those that continuously bring up that tired A/F argument of the 5d2...really should head out and do some photography instead of sitting behind a keyboard knocking the supposed "archaic" A/F system. It's a bad argument against this...dare I say, Evolutionary camera body!

No disrespect intended...but to actually get out, use your camera, make some images...you'll completely forget any shortcomings...as with any tool! Just MVHO!

The A/F system is NOT an argument to WAIT to buy a camera...nor an argument to switch companies. If you're at all interested in motion capture, Canon is King. For strictly still photography...it's 6 one way, a half dozen the other. Sounds like the OP is looking for both. If he/she has an old Canon P/S, he/she can get in touch with the Canon Loyalty program and discount a 5d2 body by as much as 25%! It's a good time to grab one...even with concern of resale value. They're still commanding excellent prices on the used market

J

 

[Edge100]

[The 5DII]still very competitive compared to Nikon (they don't have a competitor).

Absolutely correct, and often overlooked.

If I'm a Nikon shooter and I need very high resolution images (for large high-res prints or for cropping), my only option is the $7500 D3X. It's a great camera, don't get me wrong, and you're getting FAR more than what a 5DII gives you (for far more money), but it's literally the ONLY option.

Yes, the D700 has a superior AF system to the 5DII, but it's only 12MP; this might not cut it for a lot of folks. Yes, you could make the argument that people used to get buy with 8MP or less, and they made fantastic images. True, but then the same could be said about older AF systems. Bottom line is that if I need 21MP+ images, the D700 is useless to me, no how good its AF system is.

The 5DII is what it is; an absolutely terrific, pro-level camera that offers high resolution, excellent high ISO performance, low price, and video quality that is sufficent to shoot network television shows. There is literally no other camera on this planet that can make those claims. It's not perfect, and if you need low price, excellent high ISO, and an AF system that is more suitable for quickly moving subjects, then perhaps the D700 might be better for you.

But one can't simply say that the D700 is the equivalent of the 5DII; it's not (and vice versa). Horses for courses!

 

[luminosity]

I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues. They couldn't trust it and it wasn't reliable. They did fine when they moved to a D700, and so I believe it wasn't a lack of skill.

I've not read a single account of someone with consistent D700 issues, and certainly not to the point where it caused them to switch away from Nikon.

 

[firestarter]

I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues. They couldn't trust it and it wasn't reliable. They did fine when they moved to a D700, and so I believe it wasn't a lack of skill.

I've not read a single account of someone with consistent D700 issues, and certainly not to the point where it caused them to switch away from Nikon.

You can read all sorts of interesting things on the net.

I've read a LOT of accounts of people transferring from Nikon just to use the 5DII. Not many sports/wildlife shooters - but certainly in the studio the 5DII is extremely popular. Nikon also don't yet have a camera that's good at DSLR filming - everyone prefers Canon's video quality.

Having double the resolution - and low noise up to pretty high ISO - is a winning combination. It's a real shame that Nikon haven't released a D700x - Canon need the competition.

I was in the process of selling my Canon lenses when the 5DII came out and I 'switched back'. I'd grown tired of waiting for an upgrade on the 5D (and had read lots of bad things about it) and had bought a D300. Nikon make fantastic cameras, but I'm so glad that I didn't wait for them to come up with the studio/landscape camera I wanted - I would still be waiting now.

 

[Phrasikleia]

I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues. They couldn't trust it and it wasn't reliable. They did fine when they moved to a D700, and so I believe it wasn't a lack of skill.

I've not read a single account of someone with consistent D700 issues, and certainly not to the point where it caused them to switch away from Nikon.

Ah, I see. That goes a long way towards explaining why the 5D Mark II turned out to be such a poor seller. So all of the people in this thread who said that the 5D Mark II has better AF than the D700 should go check their facts. Oh wait, nobody said that.

Just like nobody who switches cameras because of focus problems ever seems to say anything about problems after the switch. The obvious conclusion would then be user error, and nobody wants to admit to that. Yes, the camera switch, regardless of the brand and model, always seems to be a happy ending, magically resolving any kind of problem.

I have a 5D Mark II and a 7D. Different tools for different jobs. And they both do those jobs admirably well, provided that the 30 inches behind the camera is functioning well enough.

At any rate, OP: Only you can put a value on whatever photographs you might be able to take in the next year. If you don't reckon that value will be much higher with a new camera, then don't get a new camera. You're then free to wait as long as you want for the best possible "investment."

 

[fcortese]

Ah, I see. That goes a long way towards explaining why the 5D Mark II turned out to be such a poor seller. So all of the people in this thread who said that the 5D Mark II has better AF than the D700 should go check their facts. Oh wait, nobody said that.

Just like nobody who switches cameras because of focus problems ever seems to say anything about problems after the switch. The obvious conclusion would then be user error, and nobody wants to admit to that. Yes, the camera switch, regardless of the brand and model, always seems to be a happy ending, magically resolving any kind of problem.

I have a 5D Mark II and a 7D. Different tools for different jobs. And they both do those jobs admirably well, provided that the 30 inches behind the camera is functioning well enough.

At any rate, OP: Only you can put a value on whatever photographs you might be able to take in the next year. If you don't reckon that value will be much higher with a new camera, then don't get a new camera. You're then free to wait as long as you want for the best possible "investment."

LOL. I know that sometimes those 30 inches behind my camera are clearly dysfunctional! Your comments I found "spot on." IMO

 

[Kronie]

I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues.

Let me guess, on a Nikon forum? Or was it the Sony forum.....

 

[jbg232]

Let me guess, on a Nikon forum? Or was it the Sony forum.....

It was the Pentax forum of course.

 

[gnd]

It was the Pentax forum of course.

Yeah, we get a ton of former Canon 5DmkII users switching to Pentax and manual focusing lenses because of focusing problems with their old gear ...

 

[akdj]

"I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues. They couldn't trust it and it wasn't reliable. They did fine when they moved to a D700, and so I believe it wasn't a lack of skill. "

Good Lord Luminosity...Come on!!! We ALL know you're brighter than that Seriously!!! "A LOT of former Canon shooters????" Seriously bud, that's a Hail Mary!!! And it got picked off in the end zone

Nikon=Great camera manufacturer
Canon=Great camera manufacturer

I don't believe for a second that a professional with investment in glass on either side of the pond would jump ship due to "focusing issues"...and if you do...I've got a bridge for sale

J

 

[luminosity]

I don't believe for a second that a professional with investment in glass on either side of the pond would jump ship due to "focusing issues"...and if you do...I've got a bridge for sale


Uh, you might want to wander over to fred miranda's Nikon forum and see for yourself. There are a number of top-notch photographers who got fed up and jumped. Jammy Straub is a terrific wedding photographer who switched due to issues with the 1D Mark III, I believe, after doing all he could do to stay.

Start a thread for yourself and ask people's input. I think you'll see that people's responses bear out what I've written. The 5D Mark II is a great camera and has helped countless photographers make great images. I've never said otherwise. My point is that for some people, it has been a source of great frustration, and in some cases, it has led people to leave Canon and switch to Nikon. Unless you are calling me either a liar or saying that I haven't actually read what I know I've read, please take my word for it or read up yourself.

The D700 is also a great camera, and whose source of frustration is a bit different because photographers go into it knowing that it has only twelve megapixels. I have yet to hear of anyone switching because of focus-related issues. If someone wants to point me to such a story, I'm all eyes.

 

[firestarter]

I don't believe for a second that a professional with investment in glass on either side of the pond would jump ship due to "focusing issues"...and if you do...I've got a bridge for sale


Uh, you might want to wander over to fred miranda's Nikon forum and see for yourself. There are a number of top-notch photographers who got fed up and jumped. Jammy Straub is a terrific wedding photographer who switched due to issues with the 1D Mark III, I believe, after doing all he could do to stay.

How is the 1DIII relevant to the 5DII? A 1DIII owner quite rightly expects very fast and accurate focussing as it's a sports camera. A 5DII owner does not to the same extent.
What camera system do you use? Have you ever used a 5DII?

I guess the reason people are jumping on you is not because of brand loyalty (hell, I'm completely dis-loyal, having switched loads of times) but because it's kind of annoying to have someone go on and on about an issue when they don't appear to have any personal experience to back up their complaints.

Undoubtably some have been unhappy with the 5DII focussing, but many many think it's fine (the camera sells very well). Many have switched FROM other brands specifically to buy a camera with this resolution/capability at this price point (although I understand the Sony alpha 850/900 is very good too).

But ultimately this back and forth switching is a load of internet noise that doesn't really answer the OP's question.

 

[akdj]

"Uh, you might want to wander over to fred miranda's Nikon forum and see for yourself. There are a number of top-notch photographers who got fed up and jumped. Jammy Straub is a terrific wedding photographer who switched due to issues with the 1D Mark III, I believe, after doing all he could do to stay."

Been there...FM is one of the forums I frequent. The 1d3 is a different camera. Completely! And didn't Jammy switch to the D3? Different price point, etc. Also...I believe that was a few years ago? The 1dIV has certainly improved upon some of the initial 1d3 focusing issues...but I don't see the relevance here, to this thread, or how this will help the OP make a decision buying the 5d2??? Also, initially you said "Many" or "A lot of photographers" jumping ship. One, and I don't know that I would consider him that popular a photographer...doesn't constitute many. Do you see where I'm going? The interwebs from Al Gore can certainly give the illusion...but I'm not even seeing that...whether it be POTN, Fred Miranda, DPReview or any of the other excellent photography forums. There are Happy shooters from both camps. Not a TON of people leaving one to go to the other because of "issues"...they both Kick Ass! Ford vs. Chevy. Period!

"Start a thread for yourself and ask people's input. I think you'll see that people's responses bear out what I've written."

I think you're wrong. And I'm not interested. If you're so SURE, why don't YOU start the thread? It has nothing to do with this conversation, and I'm getting hooked in to running waaayyyy off topic as well. Guilty as charged. FWIW...my wife is a HUGE Nikon fan. She runs a small studio in town, shoots with a D3x and D700. She won't touch my cameras. Me...total Canon geek. Love their bodies, lenses and peripherals. HOWEVER, I take plenty of shots with my wife's gear...and to me, Nikon doesn't suck! As I've mentioned, 6 one way...Half dozen the other. They both rock, and I don't see anywhere, on any sites a "Lot" of Canon shooters dumping their 5d2s for D700s. No where. If you can link me to these stories...please, I'M all EYES!!!

"The 5D Mark II is a great camera and has helped countless photographers make great images. I've never said otherwise. My point is that for some people, it has been a source of great frustration, and in some cases, it has led people to leave Canon and switch to Nikon. Unless you are calling me either a liar or saying that I haven't actually read what I know I've read, please take my word for it or read up yourself. "

I would never call you or anyone I don't know a liar. Over-Embellisher, sure! Naive to what is really happening in the day to day operations or real photographers....you betcha. But I'm not here to call you a liar. I am here, however...to tell you HONESTLY...the 5d2 is not, and never WILL be a cause for GREAT frustration in ANY capable photographer's hands. Doesn't matter if they're a Nikon guy or a Canon gal. If they're honest, they will come away impressed. Same goes for a 5d2 shooter playing with a D700. And that, my friend is the TRUTH!

"The D700 is also a great camera, and whose source of frustration is a bit different because photographers go into it knowing that it has only twelve megapixels. I have yet to hear of anyone switching because of focus-related issues. If someone wants to point me to such a story, I'm all eyes."

I don't think anyone eluded to the D700 having focus issues. Certainly not me. And I concur. The D700 is ALSO (keyword) a GREAT body! 12 vs 22 megapixels=a new thread

J

 

[OreoCookie]

I am here, however...to tell you HONESTLY...the 5d2 is not, and never WILL be a cause for GREAT frustration in ANY capable photographer's hands. Doesn't matter if they're a Nikon guy or a Canon gal.

That's stretching a statement until it's no longer true: beyond focussing issues, the 5D Mark II is also prone to banding. I also happen to know someone who is thinking of jumping the Canon ship despite a 5-digit investment for those two reasons (AF accuracy with bright primes + banding). He's just waiting what the successor to the D700 looks like. As anecdotal this evidence is, if you're talking about this kind of money, people have to really, really want to upgrade. They don't do it just because `the other company' has a single feature the other one doesn't.

Again, please don't construe this as a `you can never take great pictures with this camera' post, it's not. But if you claim that if you take pictures of the 5D Mark II, all shortcomings of IQ and performance are due to the photographer, you're wrong.

 

[jbg232]

I don't know about everyone else following this thread, but it's degenerating very quickly and becoming difficult to continue reading. Not that I have to necessarily, but the pull of the bold display in User CP with unread messages is for...cing.... my.... h..a...n....d...

I jest of course, but please, enough bickering as we're so off topic anyways it's embarrassing. Lets all just agree to disagree.

 

[firestarter]

That's stretching a statement until it's no longer true: beyond focussing issues, the 5D Mark II is also prone to banding.

Congratulations on posting a 2 year old link discussing banding problems prior to Canon's release of Firmware 1.0.7 (in Jan 2009) which fixed this.

(Slow handclap)

I don't know about everyone else following this thread, but it's degenerating very quickly and becoming difficult to continue reading. Not that I have to necessarily, but the pull of the bold display in User CP with unread messages is for...cing.... my.... h..a...n....d...

I jest of course, but please, enough bickering as we're so off topic anyways it's embarrassing. Lets all just agree to disagree.

Agreed. Maybe if we could avoid the 'I've never touched a 5DII but I read something bad about it on the internet' posts then the thread might be more constructive.

 

[Phrasikleia]

Congratulations on posting a 2 year old link discussing banding problems prior to Canon's release of Firmware 1.0.7 (in Jan 2009) which fixed this.

(Slow handclap)

Yeah, major facepalm on that one. ::::sigh::::

Maybe if we could avoid the 'I've never touched a 5DII but I read something bad about it on the internet' posts then the thread might be more constructive.

Brilliant suggestion.

 

[mdwsta4]

you obviously know what you're talking about. First that post is from two years ago. Second, that was fixed over one and a half years ago!! I've had a 5D2 since the weekend it was released and shoot high ISO where banding has never really been a problem period (wasn't the easiest problem to replicate even on the original firmware) and definitely isn't a problem anymore.

That's stretching a statement until it's no longer true: beyond focussing issues, the 5D Mark II is also prone to banding. I also happen to know someone who is thinking of jumping the Canon ship despite a 5-digit investment for those two reasons (AF accuracy with bright primes + banding). He's just waiting what the successor to the D700 looks like. As anecdotal this evidence is, if you're talking about this kind of money, people have to really, really want to upgrade. They don't do it just because `the other company' has a single feature the other one doesn't.

Again, please don't construe this as a `you can never take great pictures with this camera' post, it's not. But if you claim that if you take pictures of the 5D Mark II, all shortcomings of IQ and performance are due to the photographer, you're wrong.

Define 'a lot'. Even if 1,000 people on the internet say it's a problem, how many people is that really out of all the camera's sales? Less than 1% I'm sure. I know we all like to believe everything on the internet and if someone says something, it must be true for everyone, but c'mon!

I've just read the accounts of a lot of former Canon shooters who abandoned the 5D Mark II because of focusing issues. They couldn't trust it and it wasn't reliable. They did fine when they moved to a D700, and so I believe it wasn't a lack of skill.

I've not read a single account of someone with consistent D700 issues, and certainly not to the point where it caused them to switch away from Nikon.

I agree with other posters, this thread is absolutely ridiculous and is filled with too many idiots that have no idea what they're talking about. To the OP, buy if you want. If not, wait. Don't let us decide for you, do it yourself.