Отзывы о Фотоаппарат Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body

This is my first full-frame expensive body I have long waited to replace my 4-year-old Canon 20D. I've tested 5D Mark I for a few years but it was too expensive for me, plus it has many flaws that I decided to wait until Canon came out with the upgraded version. So, when Canon announced it, I pre-ordered it immediately on Amazon and so it arrived a month later.My impression: full frame is a beast that once I use it, I definitely don't want to go back to crop frame bodies any longer because the field of view is larger and what you see is what you get. Furthermore, image quality surpasses 20D in all aspects of it.Pros: full frame, light weight, sealed, great image quality.Cons: Expensive, bulky body, slow sync speed 1/200s, slow focus in low light. The 9-point AF system is slow, outdated. However, AF system has been redesigned and much more improved in the Canon 5D Mark III so this is no longer an issue. The way to get around the AF limitation is to learn how to use single selective focus point. When the subject is framed against strong back lighting, the camera meter will be fooled to focus on the high contrast area and most likely your subject will be out-focused.Despite the AF issue, I've learned to live and master it. I've shot many great photos of my kids and am still happy with it. However, its size and weight combined with heavy L lenses are the big drawback when I travel with my kids.If you know what you do, this camera offers plenty of power and quality when it pairs with the best lenses. However, don't expect the camera will do everything for you. This camera still have many quirks and limitations and that requires a lot of learning curves and skills to produce the best possible photos. Invest your money into best lenses if you can.If you need any help, question, please feel free to ask. Meanwhile, you could also visit my Flickr for my published images:[...]

I use the 5D III fairly regularly to create internal news and information videos for the two high-street retailers I work for. Teamed with a decent lens (L-series) the camera provides footage with a film-like quality. All the experts (Philip Bloom etc) advise to switch all the settings pretty much to 'flat' (saturation etc) for maximum post-production flexibility; this is something I would recommend doing unless you're seriously pressed for time or don't have experience of colour-correction. It also (!) takes beautiful photos thanks to its full-frame sensor, but you probably don't need convincing on that.

There's lots that could be said about what this doesn't have when it comes to film-making. No 4k. No focus peaking (although you could get round that by using an Atomos external recorder), and if that's your bag then you might want to look at the GH4 / A7s.

But there's something quite purist about the 5D III. So, to cut to the chase, for photography, it's a resounding yes. But if you're thinking of video too, then do plenty of research into all the options.

I've had one of these since January 2010. I upgraded from my original Canon 5D, and I get the impression that a lot of people have made the same transition. I was intrigued by the full-frame movie functionality and all the new features that became standard after the original 5D came out, such as Live View and a built-in sensor cleaning mode. I was also impressed with the graceful way that the original 5D has aged - it is very old in digital camera terms, but the image quality is still very good as of 2010 - and I expect that the 5D MkII will grow old just as gracefully. Moreso than the 7D, which is superior in several respects, but will depreciate like mad.Since buying the camera I have shot several thousand images and lots of movie footage, and I have taken it on holiday, mounted it on my bicycle, and used a wide range of fast and wide and sharp manual focus lenses. I have no regrets. I don't have the time or resources to subject the 5D to a thorough technical evaluation. Plenty of websites already do that, with ISO comparisons and so forth. The reviews were uniformly positive. It doesn't cope too well with highlights. If you want to shoot wide angle you're in a world of pain. Apart from that, you get a huge and malleable file.For a week I had access to both my original 5D and the sequel, and it was interesting to compare the two. Apart from a larger screen, some shifted buttons, and a more angular prism, the MkII's body is hard to quickly tell apart from the MkI. The MkII's shutter makes a clickier sound than the original 5D's hollow clack. The memory card door still feels a bit flimsy. I preferred the original 5D's on/off switch. It took me a short while to get used to the repositioned top panel buttons - they have all shifted one place to the left in order to make way for the backlight button. The screen is of a higher resolution than the original although it was not the revelation I was expecting. It has a clever automatic brightness control that works well. The interface feels a little slower than the original 5D, no doubt because it is shifting much more data. When I zoom right into a RAW file, the camera takes a moment to rez up the preview image. There's a noticeable but slight delay when scrolling through images, and it takes a short while to write a burst to the card. The first 5D felt instant. Canon still has not fixed the oddness whereby the front dial changes the aperture in AV mode but the shutter speed in Manual mode, which is mighty irritating if you do a lot of flash photography and switch between AV and Manual frequently. Nikon's interface is smarter in this respect, albeit that I prefer Canon's rear dial for setting exposure compensation.The autofocus system appears to be the same as before. It has a diamond pattern of autofocus sensors that are clustered around the middle of the viewfinder. The corners are bare. I do a lot of portrait shooting, with the camera on its side, and I would have preferred a simple 3x3 grid of autofocus points, spaced evenly across the frame. The old five-in-a-row system used by the 1n film camera would have suited me. If you use "rule of thirds" composition then the 5D's autofocus system isn't much use because there aren't autofocus points in the right place. It has 5x and 10x magnified live view which is extremely useful for manual focus. As before, the stock focus screen isn't ideal; I have installed the EG-S "super precision" screen, which is slightly better although don't expect a miracle. In practice I find myself using Live View almost as much as the legacy optical viewfinder.As a stills camera it's essentially a 5D with more pixels and better light sensitivity, no mean feat. When using the original 5D I had no fear of ISO 400 but was wary of ISO 800 and ISO 1600, although I never felt that I was just wasting memory card space when I shot at ISO 1600. With the Mk II I have no fear of ISO 800 and not much fear of ISO 1600, and for that matter I have pushed shots at ISO 3200 with impressive results. When the images are sized down from 21mp for the internet the noise becomes even less apparent. The extra resolution is handy, although it's not going to transform your image-making and it certainly hasn't transformed mine. My instinct is that the 5D MkII's RAW files are softer than the original 5D's at 100% zoom, and I'm not just copying that opinion from Digital Photography Review. When sized down slightly, or sharpened, or sized down and sharpened, they are very crisp. I like to think of it as the crispest 12mp camera ever made.If it was just a stills camera it would be a waste. Unless you make huge prints, or you expect to do a lot of cropping - and if you are, you probably aren't reading this - twenty-one megapixels is absolutely ridiculous. Overkill for most applications and, conversely, underspecified for high-end landscape and architectural and copying work. You'll be disappointed by the relatively sluggish file handling and enormous files that are fou

I recently upgraded from a Canon 7D to this 5D - I have been contemplating this for a while and thought how much better could my photos be with the 5D.

Well - WOW - I am so impressed with the 5D, I didn''t think it would be possible to achieve the quality of photo I am now getting - don't get me wrong the 7D was a great camera, but I was starting to see a lot of noise in my photos, and looking at others the noise from the 5D was minimal or non-existent.

I use L series lenses, and I am so pleased I splashed out and bought this camera, so if like me you are tempted to upgrade, and you have the cash to spare, then buy it - you will NOT be disappointed. One small gripe the CR2 files couldn't be read on my version of photo elements, so I had to upgrade, but after spending £***** on this camera what's an extra £45.00 for the software.

I also tried out the video - and this is a vast improvement on the 7D, as I always found when panning you often lost focus, but on my first test, the focus was 100% throughout the panning.

There are several focussing options, which after practising with I am getting to grips with.

All in all I am DELIGHTED with my new purchase.

Sorry Amazon - I didn't purchase from you as found it £500 cheaper at HDEW - which I can recommend - great customer service and I got it in less than a week!

the description said that the camera was 100% functional, but I did discovery late at my country, that the USB can't connect at all.

The Canon 5D mkII is an amazing camera! It takes pictures with a sharpness that I have found hard to match by any other camera and it is an excellent value, even today when it is several years old.I have travelled extensively with my MkII and have taken over 30,000 pics with it. When this body is coupled with Canon's L series lenses, it is one of the best cameras on the market for its price point. Unless you are going to be shooting a lot of movies, do not spend the extra money to get the 5D mk III, it just isn't worth it for still photography.The only downside to this camera is its weight when coupled with some of Canon's bigger lenses. I had my MkII with the 70-200 IS L and the battery grip and the camera weighed just under 9lbs. It isn't super heavy but it gets heavy enough to notice after a day of shooting. But if you are getting into a camera like this, weight is probably not your primary concern.One thing I do suggest is that if you get this camera, stick to Canon's L series lenses. Yes, they are more money but you can tell a difference between L and non-L lenses in terms of picture quality. The photo sensor is good enough that there is a discernible difference in pics between L glass and non-L glass. The one exception to this that I have found is Canon's 50mm 1.4 USM lens. This is a great lens that is also one of the biggest bang for buck pairings with this camera. I must add that I primarily shot portraits with that pairing but for what I was using it for, it worked great.

I use the Canon EOS 5D Mark II Full Frame camera in my work in public relations and marketing. This camera produces high-quality digital images and HD video images. For me, the camera was much easier to use than our older Canon camera. We used this camera to film a weekly television show. I have also used this camera for my on-air interviews.

This camera was easy to learn to use, and never has failed to produce high-quality video. The automatic settings helps to compensate, a little when there are poor lighting, etc;. It is a lifesaver. The only thing I would recommend is to have high-end wireless microphones (Sennheisers are nice), a high quality flash, and additional lenses.

I just found out I never reviewed this, so getting caught up.

Loved this camera. Used it professionally for years. The only reason I replaced it was to upgrade to the Mark III.

Reason for upgrade, doing video work, better focus system, higher usable ISO.

Great image quality, good build, full frame, low noise. Shot many a magazine spread with this beauty.

I actually kept the Mark II around for over a year as a second camera as it is that good. If you find one used, don't hesitate do get one. Great camera.

What a great DSLR. Even when I bought it and it was used, the camera still produce great quality pictures. The previous owner took a good care of the 5D MK II. I'm glad that I bought it from him. ;)

I have just started photography again after blowing some of my retirement pot on this item.
There is a lot to learn, things have moved on apace since I last wielded my Canon 450d in anger.
I have purchased a field guide, which I take to bed with me most nights (sad!) and I am learning a lot.
Even with my limited knowledge I am starting to turn out half-decent efforts, and I am now beginning to fine-tune the camera to reflect my style.
I really enjoy what this camera has produced so far, and look forward to a long and happy retirement with the canon 5d Mk111 as a trusty companion.
My camera was purchased from an American firm.

My only complaint is that the only focus point that is 100% sure and accurate is the center point. All of the others are soft and very difficult to lock focus. If the camera wasn't so expensive to buy I would sell it and buy a Mark III or whatever is next on the horizon from Canon.

I Felt like I had been kicked in the teeth when Nikon announced their 36MP D800,so much so that I held off until Jan '13 buying the 5D MKIII.Im a Canonian purely on their superb "L" quality lenses,Not only do they have superb Image quality,but most of the "L" lenses are fully dust & weather sealed.The build quality is superb, take the 70-200 F2.8 for example, as well as being a fantastic lens,is a thing of tactile and visual beauty,an absolute pleasure to use.I was fully expecting the Canon to have more MPs,and stupidly held off purchase.I can tell you the following,from user experience,& real world comparisons that the Canon is 100% more capable in lower light than the Nikon,the Canons noise profile is more like a film look,the Nikon produces an ugly chroma type noise,at times producing random splattering of noise.Lets not forget though I talking about two very high quality,pro grade cameras here!so when Im talking about noise its a different case scenario to your £300 compact.The D800 does lead in the dynamice range unto about ISO 400,then the Canon overtakes it on an escalating scale as the ISOS increase.The Canon 5D does not have an built in flash,big deal?Seriously you will never see a real photographer using a built in flash,they are best kept for Compacts,and Im glad I dont have to mess with menus to keep disabling it like I do on the 7D.The Canons autofocus is way ahead of the Nikon,with the camera way in front when it comes to fast tracking etc.Finaly,shooting speed,the Canon wins,6FPS,not only is it faster,but has a far superior buffer,the Canon will keep shooting even when the buffer is full,it will keep shooting at a reduced frame rate.The Nikon will grind to a complete halt,and at times this has been reported to be for a couple of minutes whilst it sorts its self out.The 5D MKIII is the real low light weapon of choice,Its autofocus is nothing short of outstanding.The build quality of both cameras is excellent as well.They are 2 very different cameras,I feel the 5D MKIII is the camera of choice for wildlife,sports,autosport,birding,walkabout shooting etc.I feel the Nikon would suit the Studio better,or as a tripod mounted landscape camera,I also believe that if you are purchasing the D800 purely on its higher MP count,then I believe you are best to go the extra for the D800E without the anti aliasing filter.You would of course also be using this camera with the very best prograde Nikkor Glass.The same goes for the 5DMKII as well,if you do not have "L" lenses,i see little point in you purchasing this camera,you would be better of investing in glass and getting a 650D.The 5D MKIII is a superb camera,each time i use it i love it more and more.I fully understand why canon done what they done with the new Gapless lens technology on the new sensor,its outstanding,and the movie mode is a class above everything else!

This is an exceptional camera following in the lineage of the previous two iterations of the model, each with subsequent models markedly improving on the earlier. This should not be underestimated as certainly the the MKII was an excellent camera too.

Particular highlights of the camera I've found are, of course, its full frame CMOS which results in excellent performance in low light conditions with high ISO ratings resulting in very good photographs indeed with minimal noise. Fast shooting is a notable improvement over the previous model with at least 6 frames per second sustained for a remarkably long period. I thought the build quality of the MK2 was very good and if anything this camera exceeds that. There seems to have been a gradual evolution of the position of the camera function buttons, or maybe I'm getting used to Canon's way of thinking, because now its second nature quickly and easily actioning the function I want without needing to look at the camera for an overlong period. All this helps in quickly taking the photos you want to take without missing a moment.

HD video is of such quality I can see why stand-alone video cameras are becoming redundant. On my large-screen TV playback quality it brilliant. The only minor issue is that the camera is not as well suited in form to a bespoke video camera - it just feels slightly clumsy using it for video. However, I'm not into videoing big time so this isn't really a problem for me.

There are to additions I'd advise other buyers to consider. First, the camera needs a good lens and whilst after paying this much for a camera it might be tempting to go for a cheap(ish) 30 to 80 zoom it really it worth buying a lens which matches the quality of the camera. Without this I don't think you'll get the best of the functions you're paying for. Also a large and fast memory card is needed. With fast shooting and a multitude of focussing options I've started to become short of storage capacity, and battery power, taking multiple photos of the same subject but the ability to select the best shot is well worth it.

Overall I find it difficult to see how Canon can improve on the EOS 5D III and it truly deserves 5 stars.

Usually, Amazon is very fast in shipping, but for some unknown reason Amazon decided to ship out my 5D2 kit three whole days late when I specifically requested local express delivery. They did reimburse the extra shipping charge yet didn't provide an explanation as to why the lateness.The 5D mark II is outstanding nevertheless and picked this over both the new 5D3 and 6D as there is not a significant difference in image quality other than the super ISO ability of the newer sensors. I have used all three systems and the 5D2 is quite sufficient for everything I do. The AF is not horrible as many claim, just learn what it can and can't do and work within those constraints if you rely heavily on the AF system. I have no issues in low light if the subject contains detail.Another reason why I went with the 5D2 is that the price can't be beat and the construction is far superior than the 6D, as well as the ergonomics. I shot a little over a few hundred pictures with the 6D and can't get over the small body (same size as the 60D) and the condensed AF points. The 6D may be more sensitive, but when you are working with shallow depth of field, the old "focus and recompose" method doesn't work and will throw off your focus... You need AF points that extend to the edges of the frame and the 5D2 provides this better than the 6D. Furthermore, the wifi on the 6D is Canon's method of testing the waters with a lackluster mobile app with limited range and significant lag, it definitely shines as a first generation product or one that struggled to get out of beta. No update as of this writing for the iPhone 5 screen.My upgrade path is to use the 5D2 until the 5D4 is released or if the 5D3 drops to below 2K for body only. I will say that the 5D3 is by far a better camera, but not for its price. The AF, silent shutter, and speed is near perfect, but does not overshadow the 5D2 in image quality or value.If you are moving from a crop sensor, you will notice right off the bat how beefy the shutter is as the mirror mechanism slams pretty vigorously and makes a loud and obnoxious sound with every release of the shutter. Long exposures and even slow shutter speeds less than 1/15 need either a tripod or mirror lockup to avoid camera shake from the mirror slap... It is substantial. The sound may be loud but is not a cheap sound... nothing even remotely like a rebel or crop slap, it sounds professional. If I had to compare with vehicles, I would say any rebel camera sounds like a cheap Honda with a 4" exhaust, while the 5D2 is more like the sound of a ford raptor.'Nuff said.... If you're having a hard time between the 6D or 5D3, just go ahead and get the 5D2... with all the money your saving, you can afford to put something other than a cheap 50mm 1.8 on the front, like say a second "L" like the 70-200 or 16-35. One more thing, FF demands good glass and the cheap stuff that may work on crop bodies does not cut it with this.

I have been using 1DS series for years and needed a replacement without breaking the bank. This has proved to be an excellent choice. I added the battery grip which not only gives a longer shooting time, but balances the camera better.

I just cannot resist to share my experience of using this camera for last 4 months. I was traditionally (about 5 years) a Nikon user. I was thinking to go for a professional/semi-professional SLR and was keen to try Nikon D800 or Canon 5D MKIII and went through almost all reviews available online/You Tube. I was so confused after going through all those bias reviews which ended me up where I started- means I totally undecided where to spend money. Obviously, the benefit of doubt went in favor of Nikon D800 as I had couple of lens of that brand. Got the Nikon D800 last christmas which was covered by extended return option by Amazon which was really great. It just took me a week to realize that although it is a 36 MP professional SLR, the AUTO FOCUS and LOW LIGHT PERFORMANCE was just TERRIBLE. I just did not have the luxury of having an SLR worth 2500 euros with moderately good picture quality but terrible auto focus and low light performance. So, I decided to send it back to Amazon and thanks to Amazon again for paying me back the full amount just within a week without any hassle.

Then, straightway I took the risk of changing the camp and the Canon 5D MKIII, guys I am telling you with full confidence that it just rocks!!! although there are some minor limitations such as location of buttons..... but the picture quality is just excellent (with a 70-200/f2.8 USMII), I should not expect anything more than that, pictures are just crisp sharp, vibrant and live.... auto focus and low light performance cannot be any better than what I expected, absolutely no confusion to realize that it was worth every penny spent on this camera.... way much better than Nikon D800. So, if you are someone looking to choose any one of these 2 models, my assessment is 90:10 (5D MK III: D800). And yes, I am just an ordinary lover of photography....

Fantastic camera. I don't care about the wifi of the new models or recording video. I wanted a high quality full frame SLR and that's exactly what this is.

After having spent a good month with this camera I can safely say that it's a worthy upgrade from the mark ii. The internet is awash with technical reviews so I won't delve too deeply into this. Build quality is improved, it feels so much better in your hands, the grip is better contoured and it feels much less plasticky than its predacessor. Image quality is roughly the same, though I find it does resolve a touch more detail and the iso handling is definitely better. 6 frames per second plus the option to use silent single shooting and silent continuous shooting (though the rate will drop to 3 fps) are all welcome additions (the heavy audible thunk of shutters in quiet church is not a good thing!).
Autofocus options and deliveration are awesome and not nearly as complicated as some people have made out. Select AI Servo, your autofocus preset/case and all autofocus points (61, 41 of which, lens depending, are cross type!) and it'll track a moving subject without much of a problem; it's a very satisfying thing to see the selected points skim across the scene as they track an object. This alone would make a good arguement for upgrading compared to the mark ii's measly 9 points and sketchy autofocus.
Calibrating zoom/telephoto lenses is now made more accurate with the ability to to calibrate the wide and the telephoto ends independantly, very useful.
The screen is larger with an improved resolution and is lovely to view images on. We now the ability to rate and compare images side by side on the screen and the option to edit raw images in-camera to a point. A zoom button has been added to the left hand side, and, whilst it takes a bit getting used to being in that position compared to the mark ii's zoom buttons, it becomes second nature very quickly.
I'm not a videographer so I can't comment on that side of things though I have tried it out using my 35mm f/1.4 and was pleased with the image clarity and sound.
There are a host of other functions to explore and I thoroughly recommend taking the time to familiarise yourself with them.
Oh, and here's a little tip about something that's been irking a few folk on the internet and isn't obvious in the mark iii instructions; to bring up the AF point selection display on the rear screen, press the Info button 3 times (which will cycle through a couple of things before returning to the normal aperture/shutter speed etc display, now when you press the AF point selection button the options appear on the rear screen rather than the top one).
Once you use this camera you will still love the mark ii but really appreciate how the mark iii has been improved and will not regret buying it. Prices are dropping (I got mine for £1800) making it very good value for money.
Hope this review helps in your choice.

In the past, I've owned all of the 5D series models and they have all been very good, so when they announced the release of the MKIII, its fair to say that without even using it, you know it was going to be good. I did however wait several months before buying it as its initial price of £3,000.00 was, in my view way too high - as was the battery grip which was ludicrously priced at over £300.00. I paid around £2399.00 plus £150.00 for the grip. Patience rewards as they say...

The MKIII looks and feels much more solid than the MKII. I quite like bulky cameras, so that wasn't a problem for me. They've changed some of the buttons and switches around, which you get used to fairly quickly.

As for its performance, I have to say that I was initially disappointed with its out-of-the-box settings. The first thing I noticed was that the images were slightly on the soft side (BTW I shoot RAW 100% of the time). They were not as sharp as the MKII's images. Therefore I calibrated the camera to my lenses using the FoCal software, which helped improve matters, but it still wasn't right. After asking around, I was advised that if you turn off all noise reduction in the cameras menus, that can help. I tried it and the camera thankfully started to produce razor sharp images.

As widely reported, the focussing system has been improved. Indeed the control on how you can make your camera behave on the focussing front is massive. Way OTT for my liking. A fairly large proportion of the 400 page (yes, 400 pages!!!) instruction manual is dedicated to how you can set focussing parameters for the numerous shooting modes.

Noise is well controlled, but as I'm a studio-based portrait photographer, I primarily shoot at 100 ISO. I did have a play around with the camera set to high ISO settings and its performance is impressive.

The one thing that did take a while to get set properly was the white balance. Being a portrait photographer, neutral skin tones are very important to me. Out of the 3 5D's there has been, the MKI produced the best flesh tones. The MKII's flesh tones were slightly on the red/orange side, whilst the MKIII's flesh tones are on the yellowish side - along with a very slight green tint in the darker/shadow tones. It took a few shoots before I got the setting right, which I set using the Custom White Balance setting. Flesh tones look much better now - although they still look a tiny bit yellow. Thankfully the green tinge has just about disappeared now.

Apparently, the camera can do HD video too, but its a feature that I'm unlikely to use. The video side doesn't interest me.

All in all a good camera.

First, let me start this off by saying I'm not a brand fan boy of any flavor. I've owned the Pentax K20D, K200D, Canon 40D, Nikon D90, D300 (twice), D700 (thrice), Sony A850, Olympus E-5, Canon 1D3 and now the Canon 5D2, all with associated lenses and flashes over the short course of three years! All great systems, each with their strengths and weaknesses.That said, I finally found my home in the 5D2 because I settled on what I like to shoot and I liked the *specific* features the 5D2 give me.First, let's get it out of the way - the 5D2 is not, and never will be, a Nikon D700 when it comes to autofocus performance - The D700 is a great overall camera, suitable for pretty much any type of photography except really candid / quiet settings because its mirror slap is like a small robot clapping (pretty loud).The 5D2's AF performance is pretty good at the central point. I use the 24-105 f/4 (great lens), the 85 f/1.8 and a Zeiss 35 f/2, and for the AF lenses I've never really had much of a problem with either the central point or the outer points in decent light. In lower light, I have to use the central point. Many people complain from this because one either has to use focus-recompose or shoot centrally (and wider) and crop. Both methods doable, and both methods imperfect. Frankly, it really doesn't bother me, but coming from owning the D700 I know the feeling of great AF.Instead of repeating everything about great image quality, lots of MP for cheap, etc. I'll just list some things I think the 5D2 does better than the D700, which is still the camera it's most compared against.5D2:- Has custom modes right on the dial. Frankly, I love how they work and I really dislike custom settings on the D700. Whereas Canon lets you register custom settings and quickly turn to them, Nikon makes you register basically two different banks of settings and you'd better remember which bank you need to switch to to modify which parameter. Also, the D700 has the annoying habit of "auto-updating" the bank if you happen to change a setting, whereas the Canon reverts to the bank's last-registered settings if you happen to temporarily change something then switch modes.- Does Live View the right stinking way. With Canon, if you're in Live View and you press the shutter - the shutter actually exposes the image and you're back to LV...no mirror slap (unless you're using flash). The D700? Forget it, no matter what you do, you're greeted with mirror slap. This is HIGHLY ANNOYING to a landscaper or macro photographer! Essentially with the D700's LV you're limited to using it as a focus aid and that's it - MLU is a separate mode on the dial, so you're going to induce mirror slap movement on some shots.To further this, Canon does a great job on their LV when combined with bracketing. It's nearly the perfect setup for doing tripod-based HDR (except for being limited to only 3 shots, but so far that's enough for me). Basically, place the camera in 2-sec timer mode, bracketing (I use 3 shots at -2,0-+2 EV). I register this on a custom mode. Now, when I enter Live view and after framing, I press the shutter, the camera counts 2 sec then gracefully takes three exposures with no mirror slap - Awesome!- Loads of MP - I've been amazed at how much I've cropped into some images and still result in more MP (or slightly less) than a full, uncropped D700 image.- Beautiful video - After using the D90 video for a while, frankly I wasn't expecting too much until I viewed some sample 5D2 video - looks AWESOME. I only care about video for my kids, but it's nice to have amazing high quality video in the camera.- Silent shooting modes. They really help you "disappear" into the crowd, instead of walking around like the clapping robot that the D700 sounds like :D A nice side bonus.- Smaller RAW files - Want the flexibility of RAW without the size? Go with SRAW for a 10MP image! Great for "around the house" shots, in case you come up with something awesome (accidental great shots with two young kids are possible) and need the editing leeway but don't want to fill your memory card with huge RAW files.Don't get me wrong, I love the D700 - Great AF performance and customization, great great flash system and commander built-in, faster available FPS, a bit higher ISO performance (not much), and the AF points cover a bit more of the frame I believe.But, for what I like to shoot, Canon has the lenses I like (24-105 IMO beats any of Nikon's FF walk-arounds and the 85 f/1.8 Canon is definitely better than the Nikon variant) and the 5D2 gives me superb image quality and performance. Highly recommended. I deducted 1 star from the camera because of its sub-standard AF, lack of built-in viewfinder shutter, bracketing exposure limitations and other small faults, but it's still a highly-recommended camera for its intended purpose.

I have gone from a 5D to a 5D Mk II to the Mk III over a number of years and have also used a 1D2 and 1DS2

Am I pleased with the latest version - undoubtably yes ! It is a worthy successor to the Mk II but not the giant leap that camera was from the original 5D.

Aimed at keen amateurs or pro's it is full frame with a bright viewfinder. I bought it for use at weddings with my wife who is a professional and I assist. I also have a 7D but this camera is like a full frame 7D but with better focus. The ability to change between focus points easily and select different points when using landscape or portrait is really handy.

The focus seems quicker and more accurate than the Mk II ... though unlike others I never really had an issue with it. The drive is noticeable quicker and much more useful - the Mk II was just too slow for any action. This is far more like it.

Build is better than the Mk II but not by the degree many reviewers seem to indicate. You wouldn't wish for more though.

Noise levels - I have just taken 700 pictures for a wedding in low 'ish light and noise is about 1-1/2 stops better than the Mk II ... it makes everything easier as the sensor is, well, more sensitive. I shoot in RAW not Jpeg so can't comment on that. You can go far higher on the ISO before noise ruins the picture but after noise reduction in, say, Lightroom the images are, as I say, 1-1/2 stops effectively better. I shot the whole wedding at 3200 ISO but some were at 6400 and they were still fine - something the 5D II would struggle with.

I used the camera with a PixelPro handgrip which though seemingly well made broke on it's outing - so the dear Canon one is now ordered.

The silent shooting mode was brilliant at the wedding I was at - it goes down to 3fps but makes the use of the camera far less intrusive.

The extra slot for an SD card in addition to the compact flash gives a lot more flexibility and high capacity SD cards are cheaper than their CF counterparts.

Overall a well balanced camera that is more accomplished everywhere than the Mk II, particularly in the focus dept.

When ordering a used camera sight unseen, there'll always be a knot in the pit of your stomach because you just don't know what to expect, but hope for the best. Purchasing through Amazon relieved a lot of that concern because the purchase was guaranteed. Meaning, I didn't have to worry about my money running off with the seller while I received a beat up camera.Fortunately, the seller was an honest individual when describing the camera. The Mark II was indeed used as a back-up camera (as witnessed by the shutter counter - less than 300 shots taken) and as was described, had nearly no scratches or dents on the body. I've used the camera during a wedding and can report that it worked flawlessly. My fears were turned to joy when I received the camera. I have to this point, no regrets on my purchase. It was a fantastic deal considering all the "bait & switch" scams out there by camera dealers hawking their Mark II's at a great price (when in reality, there may not even have one in stock).

Two years and still going strong. I used this to launch my career as a freelance photographer and it took awhile to get going but the camera is great!
I have shot over 40,000 images and no issues.

This camera is an absolute workhorse! Incredibly dependable, durable, and the quality you'd expect from Canon. The only weakness as I see it is the auto focus. But, that also depends on the lens you're using... I shoot commercial (products, ads, executive headshots, etc), and weddings. I put the battery grip on this and have never looked back. I've tether shot a lot with it too, and coupled with LR5, it works fantastic. We do a lot of off camera lighting with this product too: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1436033315/dixie-grip-rotating-handheld-or-mounted-hotshoe-gr

If you are willing, bite the bullet and go for the mark III... they improved the autofocus.