# Your advice for my first fullframe.



## mc (Apr 20, 2012)

Hi all, 

same old dilemma, I know, I hope nobody will be nerved by my question... 
After the long long wait for the announcement of the 5dmk3, and after reading all the reviews, comparisons and forum discussions of the past month, I still cannot take a clear decision about which camera to buy between the 5dmkii and 5dmkiii. 

The point is: I'm just an amateur photographer, I definitely want to go for one of these two great cameras and no one else, but I could not use and test them to clearly make up my mind about the effective added value of the mk3 over the mk2.

As a professional photographer I would have NO doubts (mk3 for sure), but as amateur I am not really sure...

So, the question is mainly addressed to those of you who have already tried both cameras: 
Considering the huge difference in price (1600€ here in Europe, means 2100USD!!), are the additional features (AF, IQ, silent mode, 6fps) really worth for an amateur? 
Wouldn't it be better to spare all these money and invest them in some good lens/equipment? 

thanks in advance! 
mc


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 21, 2012)

Image quality isn't a real differentiator. The question is, what do you shoot? If it's mostly static subjects - landscapes, buildings, macro - then I'd say get the 5DII and put the rest of the money toward lenses. If you shoot moving subjects - active kids, etc. - get the 5DIII.


----------



## Razor2012 (Apr 21, 2012)

mc said:


> Hi all,
> 
> same old dilemma, I know, I hope nobody will be nerved by my question...
> After the long long wait for the announcement of the 5dmk3, and after reading all the reviews, comparisons and forum discussions of the past month, I still cannot take a clear decision about which camera to buy between the 5dmkii and 5dmkiii.
> ...



I'm looking at buying my first FF also. I guess a person has to look at how much they want to spend and are those new features worth it to me. I'm going for the 5d3 (otherwise it would of been the MKII). I have some other gear I'm selling right now, so it's really paying for this upgrade. If you don't feel the differences between the MK3 & MK2 are worth it to you, then by all means stick with the MK2, then like you said you can invest in better glass. The big thing that I didn't like about the MK2 was the AF. When possible I like to buy up-to-date so I can be current for a while. This of course doesn't mean that the MK2 wouldn't be able to serve my needs as it has great IQ. If money isn't a problem I'd go for the 3. There are alot of amateurs who have better equipment than some pros. It can be something you grow into.


----------



## Aaron78 (Apr 21, 2012)

If you can fund the 5DIII, then buy the 5DIII. I purchased a 7D first, then months later, a 5DII (when they were selling for $2,000 in canada last sept.). The IQ is so awesome on the 5DII, but the 7D made it clear that i bought into old AF technology. If money is an issue though, or you don't have a decent lens base, then the 5DII is still an awesome camera, just a little behind on AF.


----------



## amgc32 (Apr 21, 2012)

rent the 5d2 first and see if you would be ok with the features it has.


----------



## AprilForever (Apr 21, 2012)

What is your current camera?

If you want inexpensive full frame, while trying to decide about the 5d mk III, get an Elan. They cost maybe about 50 bucks max... It is full frame, and an epic camera!


----------



## elflord (Apr 21, 2012)

Bodies come and go. They depreciate quickly. Lenses last. 

What glass do you already have ? 

As a FF user, I got the 5DII over the 5DC because I really wanted video. If I had the same choice over, that wouldn't be a reason -- I don't use the video on the DSLR that much. 

Difference in image quality is tiny, the main plus is a boost in the AF system. The 5DII hasn't gotten any worse in the last year and it was pretty good a year ago.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 21, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Image quality isn't a real differentiator. *The question is, what do you shoot? If it's mostly static subjects - landscapes, buildings, macro - then I'd say get the 5DII and put the rest of the money toward lenses. If you shoot moving subjects - active kids, etc. - get the 5DIII.*



*THIS IS THE BEST ANSWER* to your question - buy 5D II or 5D III

I mainly take pictures of my kids and that is the #1 reason I went from 5d II to III. The new AF system in 5D III is AWESOME


----------



## Wideopen (Apr 22, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Image quality isn't a real differentiator. The question is, what do you shoot? If it's mostly static subjects - landscapes, buildings, macro - then I'd say get the 5DII and put the rest of the money toward lenses. If you shoot moving subjects - active kids, etc. - get the 5DIII.



1+


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 22, 2012)

The question is whether or not there is a better use for your 1600 Euro. Is the 5DII plus lens(es) worth more or less to you than a 5DIII? If you already have the lenses you want, then go for the 5DIII. If not, then it might make more sense to get a 5DII at a good price (refurb, new or used) and add to your lens arsenal.


----------



## ERiKoChAn (Apr 24, 2012)

Dear all...

I'm also having the mist of getting M2 or M3. Currently using 550D for 2+years, get ready for FF. Im shooting landscape, wedding, pre-wedding shoots, portrait too. Having 70-200 2.8 MKII with me for about 1year+. Some says the M2 enough for my work (freelance job) and normal use. Should i go further to M3?


----------



## nitsujwalker (Apr 25, 2012)

For all looking at fullframe..... If you shoot moving subjects, you'll probably be disappointed with the 5d2 autofocus system--basically center-point only. Landscape, flashwork, portraits, macro, or really anything else works great with the 5d2. That said, with some patience you can make the 5d2 work for birds and other things (though you WILL miss many shots). I recently weighed my options and purchased a used 5d2 and absolutely love it. If I had 3500 bucks lying around I would still probably get the 5d2 because it fits my needs and is still exceptional in the IQ department. I Love it. Weigh your options. Choose one. Use it. Love it. Don't look back...


----------



## bycostello (Apr 25, 2012)

i still use a mk1!! albeit as a back up 2nd camera to my mk2... if budget is an issue then go for the mk2, or even a mk1... if you want a camera to take your photos then the mk3, but if you take your photos it really dosn't matter that much...


----------



## newjerseykita (Apr 26, 2012)

I'm gonna direct you to the third page of a thread i started. 

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6033.30

This was when a milestone for amateur shooters was mentioned, the original 5D full frame and then they went in to detailed explanations to why it was good and what it was phenomenal for. 

CHEERS MATE!


----------

