Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

So wait is the Canon 5D mark II really this good?

blockburner28

blockburner28

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Jun 27, 2009
361
0
New Orleans
I was looking at someone post about how good the high iso picture quality is for the 5DII.

2000 iso
4477775472_91869440b2_b.jpg


6400 iso
4477774942_3522e81691_o.jpg


Damn I didn't know full frames did it like this. I might have to bring this 7D back lol
 
It seems there is a light shining from the direction of the camera in the second (ISO 6400) image, thus it seems brighter.

Btw, as the 5D Mark II shoots 21MP pictures, and the one you showed is only 0.7MP, the noise is of course not missing.

PS:
The EXIF data shows a flash being fired, thus the light I described.

{
ColorModel = RGB;
DPIHeight = 72;
DPIWidth = 72;
Depth = 8;
Orientation = 1;
PixelHeight = 682;
PixelWidth = 1023;
ProfileName = "sRGB IEC61966-2.1";
"{Exif}" = {
ApertureValue = 3;
ColorSpace = 1;
CustomRendered = 0;
DateTimeDigitized = "2010:03:29 05:17:24";
DateTimeOriginal = "2010:03:29 05:17:24";
ExifVersion = (
2,
2,
1
);
ExposureBiasValue = "1.333333";
ExposureMode = 2;
ExposureProgram = 3;
ExposureTime = "0.04";
FNumber = "2.8";
Flash = 16;
FlashPixVersion = (
1,
0
);
FocalLength = 16;
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit = 2;
FocalPlaneXResolution = "3849.212";
FocalPlaneYResolution = "3908.142";
ISOSpeedRatings = (
6400
);
MeteringMode = 5;
PixelXDimension = 5616;
PixelYDimension = 3744;
SceneCaptureType = 0;
ShutterSpeedValue = "4.625";
SubsecTime = 89;
SubsecTimeDigitized = 89;
SubsecTimeOriginal = 89;
WhiteBalance = 0;
};
"{JFIF}" = {
DensityUnit = 1;
JFIFVersion = (
1,
1
);
XDensity = 72;
YDensity = 72;
};
"{TIFF}" = {
Make = Canon;
Model = "Canon EOS 5D Mark II";
Orientation = 1;
};
}
 
Well if you seek for the ultimate low light experience, FF is the way too go.

Generally a FF is about 1-2 stop better then APS-C

Check out D3s vs D3 and D300s, that will give you a huge :eek:
 
To truly evaluate low-light performance, you need to actually shoot in low light. Don't use a flash and ISO 6400 - shoot ISO 6400 with only the dim ambient light. Use a tripod if necessary (if the shutter speed is going to run long).

Full frame is great, but don't forget the weight and size issues with both the body and the lenses.
 
Well, as a previous owner of a %d MK2, I can confirm it is exceptionally great, beaten only by the D700 in that class in High ISO and that margin is not HUGE.

But yes, in low light fullframe come into their element.
:)
 
Yes, the 5DII really is a much better camera than the 7D. I think mine is absolutely fantastic. Added to the low noise performance, it's much easier to get creative depth of field effects, due to the shallower DOF afforded by the full frame sensor.

However, if you change from the 7D you have to realise that the 5DII won't make you look any more manly - since the body size is exactly the same. I really think you should skip the 5DII and go straight or the 1D Mk IV. This is a more substantial camera with a better viewfinder and even faster continuous shooting ability. Just imagine how heads will turn if you rattle off 10 frames per second!
 
firestarter said:
Yes, the 5DII really is a much better camera than the 7D. I think mine is absolutely fantastic. Added to the low noise performance, it's much easier to get creative depth of field effects, due to the shallower DOF afforded by the full frame sensor.

However, if you change from the 7D you have to realise that the 5DII won't make you look any more manly - since the body size is exactly the same. I really think you should skip the 5DII and go straight or the 1D Mk IV. This is a more substantial camera with a better viewfinder and even faster continuous shooting ability. Just imagine how heads will turn if you rattle off 10 frames per second!
Click to expand...

lol I love you man! You remember all of my post :p
 
i had an EOS -3 with the PB grip. I think it fired off 8 fps (close to that). Not cool when a roll of film is exhausted in 4 seconds, plus the cost of the film and to develop....
 
That first shot at ISO2000 is gorgeous :eek:

My 7D couldn't do that, not without a damn fast lens anyway... and then the depth of field would be ****ed, as that picture looks as good as it does because of the deep focus.
 
firestarter said:
I really think you should skip the 5DII and go straight or the 1D Mk IV. This is a more substantial camera with a better viewfinder and even faster continuous shooting ability. Just imagine how heads will turn if you rattle off 10 frames per second!
Click to expand...
The 1D Mk IV isn't full frame.
 
Not sure I agree about the 1D mark IV being better for low-light than the 5D mark II. The only camera I can think of (other than medium format) that clearly outperforms the 5D mark II in low-light is the Nikon D3S.
 
firestarter said:
Did I say it was?

OP was looking for a camera which did better low light and looked more manly. 1D Mk IV is better at both of those than the 5D II.
Click to expand...

Eh. The 1D Mark IV seems heavily overrated in the high ISO department to me. The D3s crushes it, despite both being rated at 102,000.
 
Well guys I finally jumped the gun. I went to bestbuy since I had a 300 dollar coupon(12% off) and 225 dollars worth of gift certificates . I have to wait til the 22th for it to come in :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back