Canon EOS Rebel T4i vs. Canon Mark 5D

dvoros

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 1, 2010
410
15
Is a full frame camera, such as the Canon Mark 5D, worth the huge difference in price or is it just the lenses that make the difference?
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,528
410
Atlanta
There are definitely more features and capabilities on high end bodies. Look at the AF, high ISO handling and frame rates on 1DX and 5DIII. You don't find those capabilities on crop bodies. We may see some AF and higher ISO capabilities on a 7DII....whenever that is released.

Canon L glass is generally better than the non-L glass. L glass can be used on FF or crop bodies. the ES-S lenses are designed to fit only on crop bodies.


So bottom line.....if you have the budget....a top of the line FF body and L lenses will give you more capabilities and features to use. But, good photography ultimately comes back to the person behind the viewfinder. A bad photographer can sometimes make a good shot. A good photographer can sometimes make a bad shot.
 

Destroysall

macrumors 65816
Feb 28, 2012
1,290
76
United States
MCAsan is right. It's the photographer that makes the difference, not the camera. One could always be technically better, but a good camera isn't going to make you an amazing photographer.

If you find yourself questioning the worth of the 5D, just go with the T4i. Spend the extra on some lenses along with a tripod and camera bag. Maybe even some photo editing software if you feel.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,528
410
Atlanta
BTW, a 5D is way too old to purchase, even if it works just fine. I would not even recommend folks get a 5DII unless all they shoot is still objects such as portraits and landscapes If I had a 5D, I would trade it in to Canon USA at their store towards a refurbished newer model for hundreds in trade in credit.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/cameras/refurbished-eos-digital-slr-cameras?gclid=CPO5iKaGurwCFSFo7Aod8D4Apw&cm_mmc=GA-_-EOS-_-131031Brand Paid Search-_-sitelink

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses
 

Destroysall

macrumors 65816
Feb 28, 2012
1,290
76
United States
BTW, a 5D is way too old to purchase, even if it works just fine. I would not even recommend folks get a 5DII unless all they shoot is still objects such as portraits and landscapes If I had a 5D, I would trade it in to Canon USA at their store towards a refurbished newer model for hundreds in trade in credit.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/cameras/refurbished-eos-digital-slr-cameras?gclid=CPO5iKaGurwCFSFo7Aod8D4Apw&cm_mmc=GA-_-EOS-_-131031Brand Paid Search-_-sitelink

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses
I don't see the issue with the 5D Mk. II, it's still a very good camera. Even for video, it can do some really great things. Some really amazing movies have been with the little 5D Mark II (look at The Avengers).
 

compuwar

macrumors 601
Oct 5, 2006
4,717
2
Northern/Central VA
Is a full frame camera, such as the Canon Mark 5D, worth the huge difference in price or is it just the lenses that make the difference?
"Worth" is a value judgement that requires criteria. So, the answer is "it depends." Larger sensors cost more than smaller sensors by a fair amount, and the sensor is the most expensive piece of hardware in a camera- but the size of the sensor changes several things- and how much those things are "worth" to you is something you have to decide. For instance, most larger sensors have bigger photosites than smaller sensors. More photons fit in a larger sensor's photosiet than in a smaller one, giving the sensor more to work with for each pixel. That means less amplification of the signal, so less noise. Now, is less noise "worth it?" If you're happy with the noise characteristics of say a T4i, then it's not, but if you're picky, or you shoot things where that's important, then it may be. Same thing with depth of field. Outside of that, "prosumer" level cameras like the 5D series tend to have more manual features, better sealing, and better battery life than consumer bodies like the T4i. A rain cape may be "worth" more than a sealed body to you, or you may find a crop camera with acceptable sealing for the conditions you shoot in for a lower price. Most of the same issues exist in terms of value for the "professional" level cameras vs. the "prosumer" ones, except the price goes up even more and the "worth" tends to go to more and more corner cases.

Only you can decide which features have value to you and what that value is. In real-world terms, for normal prints and computer use all modern DSLRs produce images that are great for most shooting conditions.

In terms of lenses, better lenses produce better results in more extreme conditions (mostly lower light.)

In overall value, I think it's still mostly true that more money spent on good lenses is a better investment than more money spent on better bodies. Also, the lifespan of a lens is a lot longer than that of a body and they hold their value much better. In two-four years, the current "Rebel" model will be better than the latest 5D today, but a great lens will probably be just as good[1] and will have held much more of it's value.

Paul
[1] Unless we keep getting denser sensors, in which case we're going to need better lenses. This happened in the Medium and Large Format world quite a few years ago, and the new "digital" lenses are much better than the others, though many of them held their value pretty well for 50-60 years.
 

nitromac

macrumors 6502
Jul 29, 2012
282
13
US
Why is this even being asked? Of course a 5D is better than a T4i... However if you don't need the 5D then DON'T GET ONE.

It's as simple as that. A great camera or lens isn't going to get you great results if your knowledge of photography is ****.
 

OreoCookie

macrumors 68030
Apr 14, 2001
2,680
68
Sendai, Japan
Why is this even being asked? Of course a 5D is better than a T4i... However if you don't need the 5D then DON'T GET ONE.
Not really: the T4i has a much newer sensor that gives better output, allows you to use higher ISOs and the T4i's AF system is superior to the 5D's (9 cross-type sensors of a newer AF module compared to 9 points where only the center point is cross type). On a technical level the 5D cannot compete with modern dslrs, and even when it was released, its AF performance was rather weak.

The only advantages of the 5D are the much, much nicer viewfinder and the ability to use shallower depth of field at equivalent focal lengths. I would not invest in a 5D these days. Honestly, if I were to get into a system from scratch, I'd get a Fuji X-mount camera.

PS Just to be clear: it's the photographer, not the camera. But if you stay within budget, why not get the best for your money? ;)
 

Val-kyrie

macrumors 68000
Feb 13, 2005
1,892
1,179
T4i vs T5i

Just curious--sorry if it is too off-topic--but techbargains is posting the Canon EOS Rebel T5i SLR Digital Camera w/ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM + 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens for a low $657.59 and Free Shipping.

I was looking at a T3i today for almost the same price, so I though you all might be interested. I am still learning about these cameras, but am interested in getting into digital photography and I can go no further with my point-and-shoot camera.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,528
410
Atlanta
I don't see the issue with the 5D Mk. II, it's still a very good camera. Even for video, it can do some really great things. Some really amazing movies have been with the little 5D Mark II (look at The Avengers).
Have you owned and shot both for years doing both still life and wildlife? I have and stand by my comment.
 

ElectronGuru

macrumors 65816
Sep 5, 2013
1,492
361
Oregon, USA
Going to mirror above and add a bit...

People who spend 3K on a camera body would not be happy with the performance of a T anything. But if you need to ask, the extra 2k+ probably isnt worth the cash. Even if you used it every day, but the time you developed the skills to take advantage of it, the 5D4 will be out.

Lenses often take a back seat to bodies, but they 1) are more important to image quality, 2) retain their value better, and 3) as a general rule should be 2/3rds of the cost of your system. I would start with the glass and add whatever body makes them sing.
 

nitromac

macrumors 6502
Jul 29, 2012
282
13
US
Not really: the T4i has a much newer sensor that gives better output, allows you to use higher ISOs and the T4i's AF system is superior to the 5D's (9 cross-type sensors of a newer AF module compared to 9 points where only the center point is cross type). On a technical level the 5D cannot compete with modern dslrs, and even when it was released, its AF performance was rather weak.

The only advantages of the 5D are the much, much nicer viewfinder and the ability to use shallower depth of field at equivalent focal lengths. I would not invest in a 5D these days. Honestly, if I were to get into a system from scratch, I'd get a Fuji X-mount camera.

PS Just to be clear: it's the photographer, not the camera. But if you stay within budget, why not get the best for your money? ;)
Well I was talking more about the mark III as the OP didn't indicate any specific iteration of the 5D and botched the name of the camera anyways.

I'm all for getting the best for your money. That's something I live by. I prefer buying better (consequently more expensive) things so I don't have to upgrade a hundred times in the long run. But I know way too many people with very expensive gear who don't know a thing about composition or camera control and just leave it in AUTO mode the entire time. It has nothing to do with me personally but it is just frustrating to see because there is so much potential being hindered by lack of skill and motivation. Buying a camera with 16fps burst and 9 million AF points will be pointless if you won't be using any of that.
 

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68000
Apr 26, 2008
1,519
890
Alaska
BTW, a 5D is way too old to purchase, even if it works just fine. I would not even recommend folks get a 5DII unless all they shoot is still objects such as portraits and landscapes If I had a 5D, I would trade it in to Canon USA at their store towards a refurbished newer model for hundreds in trade in credit.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/cameras/refurbished-eos-digital-slr-cameras?gclid=CPO5iKaGurwCFSFo7Aod8D4Apw&cm_mmc=GA-_-EOS-_-131031Brand Paid Search-_-sitelink

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses
Perhaps you should look at the photos taken by photographers at this forum:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1159990&page=465

The images produced by the 5Dc's sensor are very unique (sort of film like, and hard to explain). I would not mind a 5Dc, but already have a 7D and 5DII.
 

MCAsan

macrumors 601
Jul 9, 2012
4,528
410
Atlanta
Perhaps you should look at the photos taken by photographers at this forum:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1159990&page=465

The images produced by the 5Dc's sensor are very unique (sort of film like, and hard to explain). I would not mind a 5Dc, but already have a 7D and 5DII.
I am a POTN regular. Been there, seen those. Nothing you can't do with filters from Nik Suite or Perfect Photo Suite 8 or other software IMHO, definitely not worth owning a special camera body to do.
 

Pompiliu

macrumors 6502a
Apr 22, 2012
544
0
Technically, almost no one needs full frame.
LOL. :rolleyes:

What about people with medium format? I guess they don't really neet it, they can get the same results with a mirrorless.

Think more, post less.
 

fa8362

macrumors 65816
Jul 7, 2008
1,340
54
LOL. :rolleyes:

What about people with medium format? I guess they don't really neet it, they can get the same results with a mirrorless.

Think more, post less.
Like I said, almost no one needs full frame. The percentage of people who use medium format is minuscule, not even 1/10 of 1%. Perhaps you should learn that there are billions of people in the world before commenting again.
 

OreoCookie

macrumors 68030
Apr 14, 2001
2,680
68
Sendai, Japan
Well I was talking more about the mark III as the OP didn't indicate any specific iteration of the 5D and botched the name of the camera anyways.
I thought you were talking about the Mark I. You're right, the OP did not specify which incarnation of the 5D he's talking about, but given the nature of the question, I thought he was tossing a Mark I against the T4i.
What about people with medium format? I guess they don't really neet it, they can get the same results with a mirrorless.
There is no need to be rude. And besides, fa8362 claimed something entirely different (and he's correct): medium format is the niche of a niche just like full frame is the niche of a niche. That has nothing to do with anything but price (and in case of affordable medium format, the hassle of film development).
 

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68000
Apr 26, 2008
1,519
890
Alaska
I am a POTN regular. Been there, seen those. Nothing you can't do with filters from Nik Suite or Perfect Photo Suite 8 or other software IMHO, definitely not worth owning a special camera body to do.
The 5DC is an old camera that is found used for under $500.00. There is nothing special about it, but its sensor because of the way images are rendered by it. If you need the NIK plugins, Perfect Photo Suite and other software to reproduce the looks of a photo rendered by the 5Dc sensor, that should tell you how nice the sensor is in that regard.

That's all I am trying to say, since I do agree with the view that the newer sensors are quite advanced compared to the one on the 5Dc.
 
Last edited:

nateo200

macrumors 68030
Feb 4, 2009
2,857
6
Northern District NY
Like I said, almost no one needs full frame. The percentage of people who use medium format is minuscule, not even 1/10 of 1%. Perhaps you should learn that there are billions of people in the world before commenting again.
No one needs ANY camera...I love taking pictures in low light and I hate flash, its not some trend I picked up on I like taking pictures in situations where its insanely dark, like inside a laser tag arena (carefully!), even if my APS-C camera could reach the ISO's of a 5D MkIII there is no way it would be as usuable. Now how often you shoot in low light is a big factor, for me ironically enough I shoot in more low light than normal light settings. Of course I can take low light pictures in the dark as well, in fact I just shot Kodak Ektar 100 on my 35mm in a laser tag arena and arcade, it required really low shutter speeds and stillness though! People should be allowed to have a style and part of that is having the right tools.
 

Commy1

macrumors 6502a
Feb 25, 2013
726
69
When you say 5D I assume you mean the Mark III. In which case, comparing the Mark III with the T4i is almost silly.
You have more Megapixel, full frame, FPS, better LCD screen on camera, 3 Custom dial settings, more focus points, magnesium body... what isn't better about it.
Whether or not however you're willing to spend 4000+ dollars on a camera that is getting quite old is another story. If you're even considering it, I'd take the 6D Kit. The body isn't magnesium, and it has a couple less features but nothing major that the 5D doesn't have and you still get the 24-105 L USM lens in the kit. And it's something like 1000$ cheaper.
 

mtbdudex

macrumors 68000
Aug 28, 2007
1,776
131
SE Michigan
fwiw I'm still shooting with my vintage 2009 T1i, upgraded to good glass as my skills got better, now at 57k shutter clicks and the camera still takes good images.

OP, get the T4i (heck or T5i) and kit lens, then if you really like the hobby sell the kit lens and get good glass, then when the camera body holds you back get a better body.

I'm just now looking at the 70D as I like access to more control easier and some of the new features.
Plus some low light conditions I could really use more ISO with less noise.

But heck for general daytime shooting or with my 580EX II it does decent job.

Yep - ever 1-2 weeks these Q's come up, need a sticky to organize them and save the re-hash discussion......just point posters to the sticky
 

Destroysall

macrumors 65816
Feb 28, 2012
1,290
76
United States
The last season of House was also shot with a 5D Mk2. It all depends on the guy behind the viewfinder in the end.
yjchua95 has made a bold point. I don't think it matters how latest and great the camera or any form of technology is, it's the person behind it all that makes the difference.