First of all I'd like to mention that the 5D mk2 sample gallery is up.
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos5dmkii_preview/
Cut and paste that to your browser if you really wanna see, otherwise just save DPReview the bandwidth and take my word for it:
High ISO performance looks like the D3 more or less, except 21 megapixels instead of 12. Very decent and clean 6400, totally use-able 12800 for even professional prints of smaller sizes, and a "fun" 25600 that will be great for low-light, "moody B&W" images. Obviously when you down-sample the 21 megapixel files to 12 megapixels for comparison, the 5D mk2 will hold a bit of an advantage over the D3 / D700. Not sure if it's going to equal more than 1 full stop noise advantage, but I stopped counting when we got a clean ISO 3200, seriously!
It is also important to note that the samples are from pre-production models, so theoretically the final image quality may be a tad better!
I'm very curious to see how the final production models compare to Canon's "other" 21 megapixel sensor in the 1Ds mk3. Will canon actually be delivering a BETTER performing sensor in a body that costs less than half as much? Or will there be some kind of image quality advantage retained in the 1Ds mk3? I'll let the official reviewers determine that!
Okay, now for the REAL DISCUSSION:
...I've never seen a more polarized, love-it-or-hate-it situation in my whole 5+ years as a photographer. The Canon 5D mk2 is "the light and the glory" to some, and to others it is nothing but nails on a Canon coffin.
The biggest controversy is that Canon went for WAYYY more megapixels than Nikon's current standard of 12, and decided to leave OUT many pro-grade features like the 45 point AF, full spot metering, true weather sealing, and speed.
I will openly admit that I'm mostly in the coffin-nails camp.
HOWEVER, I'll be the first to admit that, for those who shoot in very still conditions, at very small apetures like f/8, (both studio and landscape photographers fall into this category) ...the 21 megapixel sensor in such an affordable body truly IS a holy grail for those who need the resolution. (Again, studio and landscape photographers) To have a hopefully gorgeous 21 full-frame megapixels at your disposal for a mere $2700, well it's surely a thing of beauty that Nikon cannot currently touch at all...
Here's the problem. Myself, and many other wedding photographers, are wedding shooters with a strong photojournalistic, peak-action shooting style. And almost everybody I know uses a 5D for wedding photography. The problem is, you're taking a studio camera OUT of the studio and into a fast-paced "big day", and trying to snap shots as a photojournalist.
This is where the camera's low frame rate, SINGLE cross-type AF point, 73ms shutter lag, etc. all make the 5D-series, well, honestly not much better than my OLD D70 or your rebel... I'm not trying to exaggerate here and make the 5D-series look horrible, but it is simply as close to the truth as I want to get without turning away my Canon readers.
"Well, Canon has to protect their 1Ds lineup and feature set, what do you expect- a 1Ds mk3 without the grip for $3000?" Or almost equally head-in-the-sand, "Pshh, 45 point autofocus, spot metering linked to each focus point, 5+ FPS, those are all just bells and whistles that we can do without..."
1.) Better speak up, Canon fans, Nikon didn't get the memo on "protecting" it's pro series features. We have the D700!
2.) You obviously have not shot theater, gymnastics, etc.
So first of all, let's let the studio and landscape shooters buy their 5D mk2 and be totally happy. The price and the minimal weather sealing is more than enough to tempt even ME as a landscape photographer. But I don't do that professionally, so...
Now that THEY are happy, (and not listening anymore) ...Canon shooters, wake up and smell the trickle-down pro features! Even my D300, now valued at more than $1000 less than the 5D mk2, has almost every pro feature that the $5000 D3 has. INCLUDING a shutter lag time that beat even Canon's flagship sports camera, the 1D3.
But okay, in the spirit of avoiding a 100% Nikon versus Canon debate, I'll point out that both the 40D and 50D have a potentially better AF system, too. (All AF points on both of those cameras are cross-type, even the far edge ones, which in my opinion might even be a better idea than Nikon's current 51 point setup. I think Nikon made a poor decision with their current AF point arrangement.)
The bottom line is that Canon very strongly believes in protecting it's top line of professional features, and I don't see how SOME shooters who may require those features have continued to put up with Canon for this long. It doesn't have to be this way! You do not HAVE to spend $4000-8000 to get pro features!!!
If you like Canon because they have a better lens assortment than Nikon, (and they do) ...then get OFF your full-frame high horse and buy a 40D / 50D to use for your action shots. Or go out and get an old 1D mk2!!! You will thank me later! If you use f/2.8 zooms mostly, then honestly, go down to your local camera store and TRY the D700 + 24-70 2.8. Chances are you will thank me PROFUSELY...
I guess you can tell that I don't care if I sound preachy. I think that we can all admit that Nikon has been coming out with some killer cameras recently that break new ground as far as offering pro-grade features at an advanced-amateur price. And I KNOW we can all agree that ALL the cameras on the market today can definitely deliver the absolute finest quality images.
I only want to convince everyone, Canon and Nikon shooters alike, to buy the RIGHT TOOL for the job. Don't let any "bandwagon effect" influence your buying decisions. It just so happens that a lot of Canon bodies / lenses have a bandwagon effect, and I wish those people would all wake up and smell the trickle-down. But even on the Nikon side, the D3 had a HUGE bandwagon, and tons of people bought D3's just because it was awesome and new, when what they really needed was the D700.
So all I want to say is, buy the RIGHT tool for the job! REFUSE to be influenced by camera geeks who blindly tout Canon OR Nikon, full-frame or crop... YOU go out and try the equipment out for yourself, and buy the stuff that gets your jobs done...
Thank you. Please feel free to rip on me, I think my arguments are sound enough and the facts are plain enough...
=Matt=
[EDIT]
Thankfully, it seems that many Canon users are actually quite happy with the 5D mk2. Reading Vincent Laforet's blog, It is ALL about the 1080p HD video, and the borderline pathetic AF module is hardly an issue. Apparently most people only ever use the center focus point anyway?
I guess I just have to shrug, keep on shooting Nikon, and try not to care as much about "helping" other photographers get the "right" camera. I guess bandwagons can be fun, HD video can be useful, and probably WILL totally revolutionize the world of low-light video recording. So, way to go, Canon, your marketing department will probably sell out the 5D mk2 for a year. If you want one, pre-order it NOW! I should just be happy that Nikon has come far enough that when a Canon user says their camera is better, I can smirk and chuckle instead of wince... Fair enough!
IN OTHER NEWS, reading the comments has provided a few interesting side notes. Vincent is creating a pretty extensive video production from his shoot with the 5D mk2, and excitement is building around that; even Smugmug corporate offered to host the full 1080P video with unlimited bandwidth... Vincent also hinted at a few things, including: The Canon XH-A1 video cameras don't even come close to comparing with the 5D mk2's low-light video capability, thanks to super-clean ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400 when you're down-sampling ~21 megapixels to ~2 megapixels. (1080x1920) Also, Vincent hinted that he figures Canon will make a "big brother" to the 5D mk2 sooner or later. Could this be the now mythical 3D, with pro-series features at a less-than-1D-mk3 price? I hope so, Canon would be totally redeeming themselves that's for sure!
=Matt=
[EDIT 2] Well, the 1080p video shot on the 5D mk2 by Vincent Laforet is indeed EPIC and beautiful, a fantastic use of shallow DOF that may not have ever been possible before. Now with the whole 35mm sensor to shoot on, and crazy lenses from 50 f/1.2 to 400 2.8, and tilt-shift lenses etc, ...it's pretty gorgeous considering you can do everything with "existing" photographic gear. There are still a couple issues that keep it from being as versatile as traditional video, with respect to capture speed, but nonetheless the footage is epic. Check out Vincent's blog to see the videos.
So, everybody seems to be pretty excited about the 5D mk2. And those who are excited, are ecstatic. Glad to hear it!
There is however still a strong dissent among those who are rightfully upset concerning Canon's persistence in refusing to incorporate some professional features in the lower price point bodies. If you want certain features, Canon has made it very clear that they want you to spend no less than $4,100 on a 1D mk3. (Or as much as $7,800 on a 1Ds mk3...) Personally, I'd stick it to Canon by either buying a used 1-series, ($2500-$3500!) or a D700. In fact as a long-term purchase, the D700 makes the absolute most sense out of any camera from any brand on the market today, period. Especially considering the speed boost and pro-series battery compatibility that you get with the vertical grip.
=Matt=
Recent Comments