# Canon 5Dc as an entry for FF? yay or nay?



## Synomis192 (Sep 26, 2012)

I know I've asked this before, but I kind of want a solid answer. I really do want to go FF but seeing as a used 5Dc is the only real alternative I have, I'm asking if it's actually worth it. I'm looking to keep my collection strictly EF glass because I do want to upgrade to a 5Dmk3 one day. I understand the limitations of a 5Dc (sluggish feel, horrible LCD, slow FPS, average AF) Is the 5Dc still a trust worthy FF camera that offers the basic needs of an amatuer street,landscape, and portrait photographer?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 27, 2012)

No one can tell you if its worth it to you, you have all the facts. IMHO, the 5D Mark II has dropped so much in price thats a better value. Keep a eye out for new ones in the $1700 range.
The classic models are starting to get to the age where they fail more frequently, and usually aren't worth the cost to fix, since you can get another for less.
If you happen to find a low usage one that has hadthe mirror fix, for $600 or less, it is likely a ok deal.


----------



## PVS (Sep 27, 2012)

I still use that camera, it's still great tool if you know how to use one.
For 600-800$ it's the best and the only entry level FF DSLR.


----------



## pwp (Sep 27, 2012)

The 5DC is a brilliant camera and great value pre-owned. You should have plenty of choice as photographers make the upgrade to 5D3. Look out for a low mileage example. FWIW I used my 5DC with it's original shutter up to around 400,000 shutter actautions. I gave it to an assistant who still gives it pretty solid use. However if your budget can stretch to a 5D2, that will always be the better choice.

-PW


----------



## risc32 (Sep 27, 2012)

still use it. within it's limits it great. i even love how easy the menu is because it's not loaded full of BS.


----------



## robbymack (Sep 27, 2012)

Yay


----------



## AprilForever (Sep 27, 2012)

No.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Sep 27, 2012)

yay...


----------



## Rsvdude (Sep 27, 2012)

Excellent entry level FF. Look at the shoots you can take with it. 5d2 and 3 are better but a thousand dollars or two better?


----------



## sjp010 (Sep 27, 2012)

Given that your original post demonstrates you're aware of its shortcomings, I give an enthusiastic "yay!"


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 27, 2012)

You better go for 5D2. Since you're upgrading anyway, there's no reason to upgrade to something that will last longer and you will use longer. 5Dc had its merits but it is very hard to find one that's still in pristine condition. I'd say 5D2 is worth your investment long-term. I'm also looking to upgrade to FF and I'm looking at either 5D2 or 6D. I've tested 5Dc and found its IQ almost the same as my 500D (Ti1). I can't find any reason to upgrade to 5Dc since the primary reason why I want to upgrade is IQ. Also if you want to stay on budget with regards to lenses, you can stay with mostly prime EF lenses. They're almost on par with L zooms in terms of quality but of course is inconvenient for usual professional usage (e.g., wedding). Mostly I'm into portrait, landscape and macro photography thus changing lenses isn't that much of an inconvenience to me.

One other thing, since it seems you still are not invested too much on lenses, you might want to consider Nikon (they've got better and cheaper body but a little bit more expensive lenses) though of course it depends on your preferences.


----------



## dr croubie (Sep 27, 2012)

AprilForever said:


> No.



Sounds like someone doesn't want the 5Dc getting too much interest, so the price will fall, so they can pick one up for themselves cheap


----------



## weekendshooter (Sep 27, 2012)

verysimplejason said:


> One other thing, since it seems you still are not invested too much on lenses, you might want to consider Nikon (they've got better and cheaper body but a little bit more expensive lenses) though of course it depends on your preferences.



+1! Consider all the choices you have at your disposal - i went from 450D to D700 and I'm loving it, though I'd consider switching back once I can afford a set of L primes. At the risk of offending the fanboys here, please PM me if you have any questions about Nikon  I spent a good amount of time researching both systems before making my choice.


----------



## ryanandrewbruce (Sep 27, 2012)

Once you get over the hurdle of finding one in good condition, the camera really is pretty wonderful. I bought one a couple of years ago when I wanted to make the leap to full frame and I was shocked at how much I favored it over my 7d for beautiful, low noise images. In this day and age it's a pretty stripped down camera but it simply produces great photos. I still regret having to sell it this past summer (for a brief and shining moment I had a 5Dc, 5D2, and a 5D3). If you are looking for something that is a great photographic tool at that price point, in my opinion, nothing compares.


----------



## BL (Sep 27, 2012)

risc32 said:


> within it's limits it great. i even love how easy the menu is because it's not loaded full of BS.



+1

i love my 5Dc!!! 

_as long as i don't use AI servo or go crazy with the iso haha_ ;D


----------



## Synomis192 (Sep 27, 2012)

weekendshooter said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > One other thing, since it seems you still are not invested too much on lenses, you might want to consider Nikon (they've got better and cheaper body but a little bit more expensive lenses) though of course it depends on your preferences.
> ...



I have tried shooting with Nikons and they're wonderful cameras. When I first started, I really wanted to get a Nikon D7000. It seemed like a really badass camera that kicks low light in the butt. But (teehee) I've gotten used to the settings and ergonomics of a Canon camera. I don't have a lot of glass for my Canon per say but my girlfriend and I share glass because she has a Canon 400d with L glass. I might give Nikon a chance, do you have any good FF recommendations from Nikon?



Mt Spokane Photography said:


> No one can tell you if its worth it to you, you have all the facts. IMHO, the 5D Mark II has dropped so much in price thats a better value. Keep a eye out for new ones in the $1700 range.



I do crave the 5dmkII oh so much, but to be honest I'm not going into to photography as a profession. Spending $1700 doesn't sound like a lot, but to a college student that can buy books and tuition for 2 years. I'm just not ready for the big leagues. Just purely for hobbyistic reasons. I also don't like the fact that the camera has a video mode. I don't know I'm very harsh against DSLR videography now, bad experience with a group of filmmakers can do that. 



verysimplejason said:


> You better go for 5D2. Since you're upgrading anyway, there's no reason to upgrade to something that will last longer and you will use longer. 5Dc had its merits but it is very hard to find one that's still in pristine condition. I'd say 5D2 is worth your investment long-term. I'm also looking to upgrade to FF and I'm looking at either 5D2 or 6D. I've tested 5Dc and found its IQ almost the same as my 500D (Ti1). I can't find any reason to upgrade to 5Dc since the primary reason why I want to upgrade is IQ.



Interesting, I have a T1i too. I love the IQ that my T1i gives me. I've spent so much time with the camera, that I do know how to get pretty Tack Sharp photos with my kit lens. I would be nice to have that kind of IQ on a FF camera that can handle low light. Do you have any sample images that show no difference between a 5Dc and a 500d?

(I know that the T1i does handle low light pretty decently, but I don't like shooting at 1600 or above, it just looks really dull and bleached out from the noise. It could just be my eyes though.)


----------



## Synomis192 (Sep 27, 2012)

So far there are:
(estimated from the good posts)

Yay: 6 people
Nay: 3 people

Solid NO. : 1 person.

I should have added, as a college student, spending about $1700 on a 5dmkII is extremely out of my budget at the moment. I could use that money to pay for tuition and books for 2 years, and about 5 packs of Ramen a day 

In all seriousness, I'm not really looking forward to spending that much on something that I'm not doing as a profession. I'm just looking for a great entry point and staying at there to the point where I have refined my skills as a photographer as much as possible. 

-PS: I'll put a poll here, that way it's more cleaner haha


----------



## jayvo86 (Sep 27, 2012)

It depends on your needs. Keep in mind tethering is no longer supported with LR on Lion/ML. However, I don't have AF issues. I even use the out focus points on my 50 1.2L to get in-focus shots.

That said...The 6D is very tempting with it's extra low light sensitivity and light weight.


----------



## Synomis192 (Sep 27, 2012)

jayvo86 said:


> It depends on your needs. Keep in mind tethering is no longer supported with LR on Lion/ML. However, I don't have AF issues. I even use the out focus points on my 50 1.2L to get in-focus shots.
> 
> That said...The 6D is very tempting with it's extra low light sensitivity and light weight.



can you go into a little more detail, about this whole LR Lion/ML stuff? I don't know what it means. haha.


----------



## PavelR (Sep 27, 2012)

And what about used 1Ds II?


----------



## PeterJ (Sep 27, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> jayvo86 said:
> 
> 
> > It depends on your needs. Keep in mind tethering is no longer supported with LR on Lion/ML. However, I don't have AF issues. I even use the out focus points on my 50 1.2L to get in-focus shots.
> ...


Tethering is connecting to the camera over USB and seeing live-view, controlling settings and taking shots. You'll only be able to download images from the camera. I'm sure there's other examples but tethering is mainly handy for studio situations or if your camera is setup in an unusual position where you can't get at the controls.


----------



## joshmurrah (Sep 27, 2012)

I actually tried out a 5Dc a few years ago, as a cheap way to get into full-frame.

I had two problems with the 5Dc which led to me immediately reselling it about two weeks later.

1) small, low-resolution rear LCD. I know you already know this, but it was a big deal to me.
2) No live-view. None at all. This was the deal breaker for me. I don't care about movies, but there are times where I need to put the mirror up and use live-view to take a shot.


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 27, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> I know I've asked this before, but I kind of want a solid answer. I really do want to go FF but seeing as a used 5Dc is the only real alternative I have, I'm asking if it's actually worth it. I'm looking to keep my collection strictly EF glass because I do want to upgrade to a 5Dmk3 one day. I understand the limitations of a 5Dc (sluggish feel, horrible LCD, slow FPS, average AF) Is the 5Dc still a trust worthy FF camera that offers the basic needs of an amatuer street,landscape, and portrait photographer?



I've shot the 5Dc for years and In my taste's, produced the best digital files that are most similar to film. If I had to do it all over again, I'd skip the Rebel series and straight to a 5Dc. You can add a focus screen for fast primes which my 5D3 doesn't offer. 

Its just a camera, No extra fluff. I didn't have Liveview on my OM-1, because that's what distance scales are for. : 

You can buy a 5Dc, 50mm 1.4, 100mm f/2 for just the price of a MK2.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 27, 2012)

Terrible idea. Save yourself some trouble and get a 5D Mark II, even if it's used. Huge jump in performance and well worth the extra money. Choice 2 for me would be a 1Ds Mark II. Both are only slightly more expensive but much higher/better IQ.


----------



## bbasiaga (Sep 27, 2012)

Shot the 5Dc everytime until just upgrading to the MKIII. Highly recommend. Lack of live view is a bit annoying at times, but the files are great. I'm having a hard time convincing myself to sell it now that I have the MKIII. 

The MKII will run maybe twice the price. Also great IQ and newer menus and live view....just have to decide if that is worth a couple hundred bucks to you.

-Brian


----------



## PVS (Sep 28, 2012)

no AA option, nuff said


----------



## jayvo86 (Sep 29, 2012)

I'm still rocking the 5D. Yes, there are some features that I'd like to have that newer cameras offer. (Tehtering, Live View, 100 percent VF, etc...)

However, I'm still working on my glass collection. Canon doesn't really have anything that speaks to me on a personal level and I'm not really making much money.

Being that I own a FF camera and could possibly get a back up for 600-700 bucks, it makes sense for me to stick with it until I really NEED an upgrade.

Besides...look at the attached image of my son.

For a camera that isn't supposed to be good at high iso, not great at focusing with outer focus points, and a lens that's a little soft wide open this isn't bad.

Canon 5D, 50 1.2L @ 1.2, ISO 3200, Outer focus point used for focus.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 1, 2012)

jayvo86 said:


> I'm still rocking the 5D. Yes, there are some features that I'd like to have that newer cameras offer. (Tehtering, Live View, 100 percent VF, etc...)
> 
> However, I'm still working on my glass collection. Canon doesn't really have anything that speaks to me on a personal level and I'm not really making much money.
> 
> ...



What a cute kid  I like that shot a lot. Especially the fact that it was shot at 3200 



PVS said:


> no AA option, nuff said



What's so good/bad about having no AA?



bbasiaga said:


> Shot the 5Dc everytime until just upgrading to the MKIII. Highly recommend. Lack of live view is a bit annoying at times, but the files are great. I'm having a hard time convincing myself to sell it now that I have the MKIII.
> 
> The MKII will run maybe twice the price. Also great IQ and newer menus and live view....just have to decide if that is worth a couple hundred bucks to you.
> 
> -Brian



I don't like using live view. It eats up my batteries for my 500d, and it feels slow because the mirror is up. haha. I like having a physical mirror that clicks and clacks and stuff. 

Upgrading to the 5dmkII does sound extremely nice, but I'm not going to anytime soon. I get paid minimum age and make less than $5000 a year, I still live with my parents, I have a girlfriend and I'm going to college. *I'm a typical 18 year old, and having extremely professional equipment at this age seems quite insensible


----------



## JohanCruyff (Oct 1, 2012)

It was my first and is so far my only DSLR, bought (used) 2 years ago.

I must admit I sometimes miss the much better rear LCD, Live view, sensor-shaker, the wider ISO range and... not many other features.

For the price of a current 600d / T3i, i think it is still a good value for money.


----------



## keithcooper (Oct 1, 2012)

*Re: Canon 5D as an entry for FF? yay or nay?*

Yes, particularly if you find one with light use (they do appear) - of course, a lot depends on what sorts of photography you're in to...

They are getting on a bit though, so care is needed

I still keep my 1Ds as a backup camera - the batteries run down rather faster than a modern camera, but it's actually just fine still for a lot of my work (quite a lot of my commercial work is only ever printed in brochures, or used on the web). Of course, getting an old 1 series will get you used to 1 series AF, handling and a very bright clear viewfinder... this may build arm strength and additionally, adversely affect your appreciation of the XXD and XXXD range ;-)


----------



## Pyrenees (Oct 1, 2012)

Strange voting setup 

Edit: I voted for Yay (aka "Yes").

Great sharpness capabilities, beautiful colour rendition. Also love the simplicity of the thing.

Sold mine about 8 months ago. What a mistake that was


----------



## SambalOelek (Oct 1, 2012)

Nay from me given your current situation. I'd rather invest in some good EF lenses. In most situations, your 500D can produce pictures that are indiscernable from a FF camera at equivalent focal lengths. 

I've owned several 5Dc's, most recently right before 5D III hit the stores. Coming from a more modern camera (5DII), I have to say the LCD was a bit frustrating to use. It's nigh impossible to determine if the image is tack sharp, or just slightly OOF. I also found the colors to be off (greenish cast). 

On the other hand, the images are really good, and I didn't really miss the IQ of the 5D II/III (at ISO<1600). It's a "no frills" image making machine.

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of used 5D's will come with dirty sensors, and if you're not comfortable cleaning it yourself, you may want to factor in that additional cost.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 2, 2012)

Pyrenees said:


> Strange voting setup
> 
> Edit: I voted for Yay (aka "Yes").
> 
> ...



Orginally, that NO. was supposed to be a joke and have only one person voting for NO. because someone on the topic just posted NO. haha. 

The simplicity of the 5Dc is what really draws me to it as well. Nice to know it retains the film shooting experience in a sense.



SambalOelek said:


> Nay from me given your current situation. I'd rather invest in some good EF lenses. In most situations, your 500D can produce pictures that are indiscernable from a FF camera at equivalent focal lengths.
> 
> I've owned several 5Dc's, most recently right before 5D III hit the stores. Coming from a more modern camera (5DII), I have to say the LCD was a bit frustrating to use. It's nigh impossible to determine if the image is tack sharp, or just slightly OOF. I also found the colors to be off (greenish cast).
> 
> ...



Thanks for the feedback on the LCD, I think the LCD will be the biggest gripe about the camera but I think I can last. For the EF lenses, I would but I don't like the fact that the 24-105mm f/4L is considered a tele-lens. I like shooting really wide, which is why I'm considering getting the 17-40mm f/4L first. 



keithcooper said:


> Yes, particularly if you find one with light use (they do appear) - of course, a lot depends on what sorts of photography you're in to...
> 
> They are getting on a bit though, so care is needed
> 
> I still keep my 1Ds as a backup camera - the batteries run down rather faster than a modern camera, but it's actually just fine still for a lot of my work (quite a lot of my commercial work is only ever printed in brochures, or used on the web). Of course, getting an old 1 series will get you used to 1 series AF, handling and a very bright clear viewfinder... this may build arm strength and additionally, adversely affect your appreciation of the XXD and XXXD range ;-)



I've considered the Canon 1Ds MKii as well. It look like it can handle a lot, but is the IQ, DR and the High ISO as good as a 5Dc?


----------



## K-amps (Oct 2, 2012)

I went from a 5Dc to a 5D3... When I got the 5Dc, the 5Dii cost about $2500...

Get the 5Dc for nice flesh tones and nice DoF.

However the other big advantage of FF is ISO performance... in that regard it is no better than the T2i... add to that no Auto ISO... So the only real advantage over an older Rebel is shallow DoF...

I say get a 5Dii... thats a big jump over the T2i and 5Dc.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 2, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> Pyrenees said:
> 
> 
> > Strange voting setup
> ...



1DS2 is a little bit better than 5Dc in almost all aspects except LCD size. In fact if you compare 5D2 and 1DS2, 5D2 is just a little bit better. If you don't need to work that much in low-light I'd say 5D2 is almost the same as 1DS2. I'm waiting for 6D. If it turns out that it's not too good, I might resort to 1DS2 since I usually don't take shots in low-light. Just as 5Dc, your only gripe with 1DS2 would be the LCD. Currently 1DS2 is selling a lot cheaper than 5D2 in my place. I'm expecting the price to go down more for both so maybe next year, we'll see.


----------



## AprilForever (Oct 2, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> AprilForever said:
> 
> 
> > No.
> ...



No, but good guess!!! I am patiently awaiting my 7D MK II. It will come.


----------



## dr croubie (Oct 2, 2012)

Meanwhile, to those saying about buying a 1Ds2 instead:

I would have been one of you until very recently. The 1Ds2 slots in at just over $1k, between the 5D and 5D2. And I was also contemplating buying one myself.
But there's a good thread to read here, especially the last posts on the second page, that has put me off a bit.
Notbaly the bit that a lot of settings are not settable in the camera, you must use EOS utility on WinXP via firewire to set them, no other way apparently. And seeing as I don't use XP, or even Windows (except at work, but that got Win7ed last week, it's still not working properly), that's pretty much a deal-breaker for me.
That and the crummy LCD, but seeing as I'm used to film then I could just treat it like a film camera in some respects.

Damn those images do look nice though.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 2, 2012)

K-amps said:


> I went form a 5Dc to a 5D3... When I got the 5Dc, the 5Dii cost about $2500...
> 
> Get the 5Dc for nice flesh tones and nice DoF.
> 
> ...



I know that high ISO is the same as a T2i. But upgrading from a T1i to a T2i seems like a step in the same direction going nowhere. I won't get that FF look, and I don't really see a big upgrade. I don't use the video mode on my camera anymore so I don't think I'll be using the T2i's video mode as much. That's why I'm so interested in the Canon 5Dc. It's a pure photography camera that doesn't have too many bells and whistles.



dr croubie said:


> Meanwhile, to those saying about buying a 1Ds2 instead:
> 
> I would have been one of you until very recently. The 1Ds2 slots in at just over $1k, between the 5D and 5D2. And I was also contemplating buying one myself.
> But there's a good thread to read here, especially the last posts on the second page, that has put me off a bit.
> ...



Thanks Doctor, you saved my life (LOL)
I was completely considering getting a 1Ds2 but after reading that link, maaan I'm sure glad my heart is set on the 5Dc (well, it's like 75%. I still need more views from people.) I still have my WinXP machine, but It's so damn old and I don't know if I have a firewire cable to change stuff on the camera itself. Thanks so much for the warning, and you are right. Those images look soo nice from the camera.



AprilForever said:


> dr croubie said:
> 
> 
> > AprilForever said:
> ...



Haha nice save  just kidding. I thought that the 6D would be the replacement for the 7D, but lo and behold, it' replaced the 5DmkII :[ Why has canon not been helpful for the APS-C photographers. The T4i is mainly targeted at budget filmmakers. Why can't they make a dedicated photography camera that doesn't have a video mode anymore.



verysimplejason said:


> 1DS2 is a little bit better than 5Dc in almost all aspects except LCD size. In fact if you compare 5D2 and 1DS2, 5D2 is just a little bit better. If you don't need to work that much in low-light I'd say 5D2 is almost the same as 1DS2. I'm waiting for 6D. If it turns out that it's not too good, I might resort to 1DS2 since I usually don't take shots in low-light. Just as 5Dc, your only gripe with 1DS2 would be the LCD. Currently 1DS2 is selling a lot cheaper than 5D2 in my place. I'm expecting the price to go down more for both so maybe next year, we'll see.



I like the 1Ds2, but from what Dr. Croubie said, I got a majorly turned off from the camera. I do work a lot in low light though, I can't really shoot in the day because of college so I'm out shooting at around 5:00pm - 6:00pm (good think the Sun doesn't set till like 8:00pm in California ) I also don't like how HUGE a 1D series camera is. I'm not a sports photographer, so I don't know if I can handle all of the extra weight from that behemoth of a camera. 
(My T1i is gripped though... is that the same weight as a 1D camera?)


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 2, 2012)

How about this matchup?

Canon 5Dc vs Canon 1DsmkII

Which has better...

IQ:
High ISO:
Handling:
Features:
Battery Life:
Shutter Life:
Color Depth:
Landscape:
Portraits:
Street Photography:
Kids:
Parties (formal and non-formal):


----------



## bdunbar79 (Oct 3, 2012)

The 1D Mark II is simply an old pro sports camera and quite frankly by today's standards, is no longer a good camera vs. what you can get for your money today. It's not even worth considering. You can get a 1D Mark III for just a bit more.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 3, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> The 1D Mark II is simply an old pro sports camera and quite frankly by today's standards, is no longer a good camera vs. what you can get for your money today. It's not even worth considering. You can get a 1D Mark III for just a bit more.



Thanks for your input, I'll keep my head towards the 5Dc.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 3, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> The 1D Mark II is simply an old pro sports camera and quite frankly by today's standards, is no longer a good camera vs. what you can get for your money today. It's not even worth considering. You can get a 1D Mark III for just a bit more.



Agreed. I upgraded from a 1D mk.ii to the 5Dc... the IQ jump was amazing. But I see a similar jump in IQ to the 5Diii (which is very similar to the IQ of the 5Dii).


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 3, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Agreed. I upgraded from a 1D mk.ii to the 5Dc... the IQ jump was amazing. But I see a similar jump in IQ to the 5Diii (which is very similar to the IQ of the 5Dii).



How good is the IQ of a 5Dc though? Is it impressive by today's standards?


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 3, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed. I upgraded from a 1D mk.ii to the 5Dc... the IQ jump was amazing. But I see a similar jump in IQ to the 5Diii (which is very similar to the IQ of the 5Dii).
> ...



Its still better than any APS-C camera canon makes.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Oct 3, 2012)

I think the 5Dc IQ is pretty substantial.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 3, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Its still better than any APS-C camera canon makes.



Thanks, I think I'll make the jump by the end of this year 



bdunbar79 said:


> I think the 5Dc IQ is pretty substantial.



Yay. haha. I also wanted to get a 5Dc so that once I started my EF collection, I feel like putting them to waste on an APS-C


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 3, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > The 1D Mark II is simply an old pro sports camera and quite frankly by today's standards, is no longer a good camera vs. what you can get for your money today. It's not even worth considering. You can get a 1D Mark III for just a bit more.
> ...



1D2 is very different from 1DS2. While 1D2 is a sports camera, 1DS2 is more of a studio/landscape camera. I While I agree that 1D2 is outdated by 1D3 standards, 1DS2 is still better than 1D3 in terms of IQ.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 3, 2012)

verysimplejason said:


> 1D2 is very different from 1DS2. While 1D2 is a sports camera, 1DS2 is more of a studio/landscape camera. I While I agree that 1D2 is outdated by 1D3 standards, 1DS2 is still better than 1D3 in terms of IQ.



Don't get mad at the guy, I actually edited that post after his input on the 1D2. Now, I'm wondering about the 1dsII vs the 5Dc. Do you have any input between the two cameras?


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 3, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > 1D2 is very different from 1DS2. While 1D2 is a sports camera, 1DS2 is more of a studio/landscape camera. I While I agree that 1D2 is outdated by 1D3 standards, 1DS2 is still better than 1D3 in terms of IQ.
> ...



I'm not mad. I just made it clearer for others. As I had said, 1DS2 is a better from 5DC in terms of IQ and almost everything you can think of except weight, LCD (3 vs 3.2 but same resolution) and having to use a computer to set some internal settings as somebody had mentioned before. You can go to DPReview and DXOmark for comparisons.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 3, 2012)

verysimplejason said:


> I'm not mad. I just made it clearer for others. As I had said, 1DS2 is a better from 5DC in terms of IQ and almost everything you can think of except weight, LCD (3 vs 3.2 but same resolution) and having to use a computer to set some internal settings as somebody had mentioned before. You can go to DPReview and DXOmark for comparisons.



Oh okaaay, sorry about that. I don't want to seem hostile  I'm friendly I promise. The 1Ds2 does look and sound like a very promising camera, but it's such an expensive purchase, that If I'm desperate enough to eat ramen for 6 months I could afford it. Then again, at the prices that the Canon 1ds2 I can buy a Used Canon 5dmkII.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 3, 2012)

Synomis192 said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not mad. I just made it clearer for others. As I had said, 1DS2 is a better from 5DC in terms of IQ and almost everything you can think of except weight, LCD (3 vs 3.2 but same resolution) and having to use a computer to set some internal settings as somebody had mentioned before. You can go to DPReview and DXOmark for comparisons.
> ...



5D2 price isn't that much more than 1DS2. Then again, it entirely depends on what you want. If what you're after is better IQ and low-light performance, then by all means go for 5D2. 5D2 is better than 1DS2 when it comes to that. I myself also wants either a 5D2 or 6D more than a 1DS2. I'll just wait next year at least until end of March before deciding what to purchase. At least by then we'll know what's worth buying. 6D and 5D2 might have gone down in price by that time. For now, I'll just stick to 500D. Mine is also gripped.  I find it hard to use if it's not gripped especially when I'm using my 100mm. If I buy 6D, for sure it will be gripped.


----------



## atvinyard (Oct 4, 2012)

5Dc is what i did to upgrade from a T2i. I use it much more than the T2i now. It performs better in low light and has a better noise characteristic at iso 1600. It takes less kindly to underexposure than the T2i. Got a pretty beat up copy for about $650. It has worked just fine (knocking on wood). Image quality is great. I recommend it. Keep the other one though, if you can afford to. It's comparatively light and small and is easier to throw in a bag and carry along when you don't feel like lugging around the clunker.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 4, 2012)

atvinyard said:


> 5Dc is what i did to upgrade from a T2i. I use it much more than the T2i now. It performs better in low light and has a better noise characteristic at iso 1600. It takes less kindly to underexposure than the T2i. Got a pretty beat up copy for about $650. It has worked just fine (knocking on wood). Image quality is great. I recommend it. Keep the other one though, if you can afford to. It's comparatively light and small and is easier to throw in a bag and carry along when you don't feel like lugging around the clunker.



Thanks so much for this info man, this is what I was looking for  How sharp are the photos compared to your T2i though? I've seen the IQ from the T2i, and it's impressive for such an inexpensive camera.



verysimplejason said:


> 5D2 price isn't that much more than 1DS2. Then again, it entirely depends on what you want. If what you're after is better IQ and low-light performance, then by all means go for 5D2. 5D2 is better than 1DS2 when it comes to that. I myself also wants either a 5D2 or 6D more than a 1DS2. I'll just wait next year at least until end of March before deciding what to purchase. At least by then we'll know what's worth buying. 6D and 5D2 might have gone down in price by that time. For now, I'll just stick to 500D. Mine is also gripped.  I find it hard to use if it's not gripped especially when I'm using my 100mm. If I buy 6D, for sure it will be gripped.



I agree with you, that 6D is really mouth-watering (for an APS-C user) but it's just too bad it's extermely over my budget. WOO! 500D club! I gripped my because I did potraits for my Video productions class, and having a battery grip also helped for stability in my low light shots. I take it off when I'm just going out with my girlfriend, but it stays on most of the time.


----------



## symmar22 (Oct 7, 2012)

If your budget is limited, the 5Dc sounds like a good choice, it might seem simple by nowadays standards, but still, it is a very good camera that makes very clean frames. For general photography, it is a very decent performer.

I hear good deals about 5D2 or 6D, but we are talking about 1500-2000$ cameras here. With a bit of patience, you could find a 5Dc for 500-600 $, that's 1/3 of the price. Buy it, use it, and when you'll feel the need for something else, you can still sell it for 400$ and think about the camera you really need (or want). For 1000$ difference, you could as well buy a few good primes, that you will use for a long, long time


----------



## Fotofanten (Oct 7, 2012)

For me, the 5D classic experience was just that, classic. With the low res joke of a screen (by today standards), only a single focus point that is trustworthy, no live view and no auto ISO, you really have to adapt to the cameras limitations and become one with it, keeping your current settings in mind and moving thoughtfully, calculating the impact of every change in light and so on. The files are gorgeous, and quite robust in post processing, so it's a very rewarding experience, especially in low contrast scenes where you can expose to the right. In fact I doubt they are much worse than the files from the 5D II or even the mk III, unless you print big. The one major drawback for my use was the never ending sensor cleaning sessions. I would not recommend the 5DC unless it came with Copper Hills Basic Kit and the will to use it. The 5DC is for those who value hard earned file quality and price above all else.


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 8, 2012)

Fotofanten said:


> For me, the 5D classic experience was just that, classic. With the low res joke of a screen (by today standards), only a single focus point that is trustworthy, no live view and no auto ISO, you really have to adapt to the cameras limitations and become one with it, keeping your current settings in mind and moving thoughtfully, calculating the impact of every change in light and so on. The files are gorgeous, and quite robust in post processing, so it's a very rewarding experience, especially in low contrast scenes where you can expose to the right. In fact I doubt they are much worse than the files from the 5D II or even the mk III, unless you print big. The one major drawback for my use was the never ending sensor cleaning sessions. I would not recommend the 5DC unless it came with Copper Hills Basic Kit and the will to use it. The 5DC is for those who value hard earned file quality and price above all else.



That is the kind of experience that I'm looking for in photography. I just want to have a great experience with a great camera that can produce absolutely stunning photos (don't get me wrong any DSLR can give great output but there's just something about FF that never ceases to amaze me). How bad is the sensor cleaning though? Is it something that I can do at home or do I have to keep going to my local photo store to get it cleaned for $45? I wouldn't mind if I had to clean the sensor myself, it's just I don't really know what I'm doing haha. 



symmar22 said:


> If your budget is limited, the 5Dc sounds like a good choice, it might seem simple by nowadays standards, but still, it is a very good camera that makes very clean frames. For general photography, it is a very decent performer.
> 
> I hear good deals about 5D2 or 6D, but we are talking about 1500-2000$ cameras here. With a bit of patience, you could find a 5Dc for 500-600 $, that's 1/3 of the price. Buy it, use it, and when you'll feel the need for something else, you can still sell it for 400$ and think about the camera you really need (or want). For 1000$ difference, you could as well buy a few good primes, that you will use for a long, long time



Sadly, my budget is very, very limited but once I can afford a 5Dc (hopefully it's not going to be too late) I'm going enjoy the hell out of it. The 5dmkII and the 6D are cameras that I'd be looking into once I have some good glass to enjoy them with you know what I'm saying?


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 9, 2012)

Do your part as a photographer and you can get great result like these I've had with my 5Dc.

No one can bash this cameras IQ. Its solid all the way up to its limit of 3200.

Pic 1 - ISO 50

Pic 2 - ISO 800

Pic 3 - ISO 3200 (Limit)


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 9, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Do your part as a photographer and you can get great result like these I've had with my 5Dc.
> 
> No one can bash this cameras IQ. Its solid all the way up to its limit of 3200.
> 
> ...



Wicked photos man. Those photos are cleaner than a maid's quarters. I'm really impressed with the low light performance of the body. You know, I just recently learned a lot about photography that I didn't know. I now know how to use a speedlight correctly. What i mean is that I know about 2nd Curtain firing, I finally understand what stops are haha. Hopefully I know a lot more stuff about photography once I get my hands on a 5Dc.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 9, 2012)

Nice shots RL... but there has to be some NR going on there... I had a 5Dc and I could get visible noise at 400 iso and needed denoising.... 

I agree the image the 5D gives is very good. But I tested the amount of noise it had compared to a T2i and at 1600 ISo the T2i was cleaner. The only advantage the 5Dc has was shallow DoF, rest the T2i won on other criteria.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 9, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Nice shots RL... but there has to be some NR going on there... I had a 5Dc and I could get visible noise at 400 iso and needed denoising....
> 
> I agree the image the 5D gives is very good. But I tested the amount of noise it had compared to a T2i and at 1600 ISo the T2i was cleaner. The only advantage the 5Dc has was shallow DoF, rest the T2i won on other criteria.



I disagree. The 5Dc still has better ISO performance than my 7D. Here is the untouched, full-res, no-NR jpg straight from lightroom. Since lenses are sharper on FF, it makes the noise seem more like grain and not like mush on APS-C. This means you can be more aggressive with NR and keep sharpness than aps-C. 

Its a very clean file. Feel free to examine it for your determination.

ISO-3200 is quite usable. Remember, this file has no sharpening or post-processing of any kind.

http://images.us.viewbook.com/9a8bb8062cdfc9b86e057b85a601e742.jpg


----------



## K-amps (Oct 10, 2012)

Thats pretty good for 3200. I never got shots with this low grain/ noise on 3200 on my 5dc...


----------



## sagittariansrock (Oct 10, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> I disagree. The 5Dc still has better ISO performance than my 7D. Here is the untouched, full-res, no-NR jpg straight from lightroom. *Since lenses are sharper on FF,* it makes the noise seem more like grain and not like mush on APS-C. This means you can be more aggressive with NR and keep sharpness than aps-C.
> 
> Its a very clean file. Feel free to examine it for your determination.
> 
> ...



Why are lenses sharper on FF?


----------



## dr croubie (Oct 10, 2012)

sagittariansrock said:


> Why are lenses sharper on FF?



It's not that they're sharper, every lens only resolves so many line-pairs per mm and that's it, it's that on FF they appear sharper.
Take an 18MP sensor, it's got 3456 pixels high.
On aps-c (7D etc), that's 3456 pixels in 16mm, pixels are 4.6 microns apart, 216 pixels per mm
On FF (ie 1DX), that's 3456 pixels in 24mm, pixels are 6.9 microns apart, 144 pixels per mm

Maximum (theoretical) resolution should be 1 line-pair in 2 pixels (read here as to why this is unrealistic in the real world).

Anyway, take a lens that can resolve 72 lppmm, and put it on a 1DX. Take an image of a test chart that has 72lppmm. In a perfect world, that would give you an image that contains 72lppmm.
Take that same lens, and put it on a 7D. The lens can only resolve 72lppmm, but the sensor can see up to 108lppmm.
Blow both of those images up to the same size. The 1DX image contains 72*24 = 1728 line pairs. The 7D image only contains 72*16 = 1152 line pairs (and probably some aliasing and artefacts too). So the same lens on the 1DX looks 'sharper', as it were, it's resolving the maximum that the sensor can handle, whereas on the 7D it's only resolving a lower number.


All of that is theoretical, of course, and a lot of things make those numbers impossible (like Bayer and AA filters, read the above link). Counteracting this, there's also the fact that most lenses get softer near the FF corners, which just doesn't show up on APS-C sensors, so take that into consideration too...


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 10, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Thats pretty good for 3200. I never got shots with this low grain/ noise on 3200 on my 5dc...



Did you nail your exposure's?

Also, the larger the format of film, the less critical it is of the lens you put in front of it.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 10, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > Thats pretty good for 3200. I never got shots with this low grain/ noise on 3200 on my 5dc...
> ...



I think I did... infact I was looking at some of my older shots and I have visible grain in the well exposed areas (100% views ofcourse) at ISO 640... I deleted a bunch of older stuff yesterday and I saw one that showed this phenomenon. I don't think I had a defective body... it took amazing shots at below 400 ISO. 

I just expected it to trounce the T2i in 1600-3200, and it did not seem to do so...

I did love the Viewfinder though compared to the T2i. I like the Auto ISO on the T2i, makes shooting on the go so much easier.


----------



## KyleSTL (Oct 10, 2012)

I've only taken my 5D out in low light a few times since I bought it a few weeks ago. My camera shows banding at 3200, and some noise (with no obvious patterning) at 1600 and 800. The 800 and 1600 noise is pretty easily correctable in DPP (I always shoot raw), but the 3200 requires the slider to move further than I'm accustommed to and results in blurring of details easily visible at 50%. Overall, I'm very happy with my 5Dc. I did miss the extra 'reach' of my previous cameras (XT, XTi, 30D) when I went to a baseball game last week (front row, right field line, ~50 ft beyond 1st base), but I can always buy longer lenses in the future, or crop when necessary.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 10, 2012)

KyleSTL said:


> I've only taken my 5D out in low light a few times since I bought it a few weeks ago. My camera shows banding at 3200, and some noise (with no obvious patterning) at 1600 and 800. The 800 and 1600 noise is pretty easily correctable in DPP (I always shoot raw), but the 3200 requires the slider to move further than I'm accustommed to and results in blurring of details easily visible at 50%. Overall, I'm very happy with my 5Dc. I did miss the extra 'reach' of my previous cameras (XT, XTi, 30D) when I went to a baseball game last week (front row, right field line, ~50 ft beyond 1st base), but I can always buy longer lenses in the future, or crop when necessary.



This mirrors my experiences as well. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 10, 2012)

K-amps said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > K-amps said:
> ...



Do you have any examples of excessive noise @ 640?


----------



## K-amps (Oct 10, 2012)

Actually Ramon, I would not call it excessive. Overall it was not bad, many of the 3200 shots i took were usable after NR albeit at the cost of some sharpness. I think it was a fine Camera.... its just unfair to compare it to the 5diii... which I sometimes mentally do. 

I have not seen banding unless I lift dark/ under-exposed areas even at 3200 and if I shot to the right, it was better ...


----------



## Synomis192 (Oct 10, 2012)

KyleSTL said:


> I've only taken my 5D out in low light a few times since I bought it a few weeks ago. My camera shows banding at 3200, and some noise (with no obvious patterning) at 1600 and 800. The 800 and 1600 noise is pretty easily correctable in DPP (I always shoot raw), but the 3200 requires the slider to move further than I'm accustommed to and results in blurring of details easily visible at 50%. Overall, I'm very happy with my 5Dc. I did miss the extra 'reach' of my previous cameras (XT, XTi, 30D) when I went to a baseball game last week (front row, right field line, ~50 ft beyond 1st base), but I can always buy longer lenses in the future, or crop when necessary.



Glad to know that RAW files are handled well using PP. I still don't know how to use NR setting correctly though, is there a certain value that you use when you use NR levels?

Interestingly enough, I was reading your gear list on your sig, you have the same lenses. On a side note, how well does the 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 work on a 5Dc. I think that's my go to EF lens for now once I upgrade that is.


----------

