Отзывы о Фотоаппарат Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body
591 отзывов пользователей о Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body
Пользовались
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор
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.
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....
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.
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.
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.
I have shot over 40,000 images and no issues.
If you are willing, bite the bullet and go for the mark III... they improved the autofocus.
The 5D Mark ii has a really solid feel to it. The construction is really sturdy, made from magnesium alloy. It has nice nice dust and weather resistance throughout - right down to the memory card slot, battery door, LCD and buttons. The accessory shoe is well-built and I have never had any problems with connectivity with my external flash or wireless triggers. The EF lens mount (the 5D Mark ii will not mount any EF-S lenses) is firm and gives no discernible travel - even when I have my Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS ii attached.
Controls, Menus and Display:
The controls and menus are intuitive. Placements of main dial, quick control dial, ISO, AF, and enlarge/reduce buttons are all fine . Canon allows for a "my menu" feature that allows you to make your own custom functions - I haven't personally used this but it looks pretty useful.
The display is bright and sharp. I can view it well even outdoors in bright sunlight. The various display modes are helpful (4 in all - Large image and status line; Large image status line and image #; Small image, status line, lum histogram; Small image, status line, lum+RGB histograms).
Live view works well, one can also zoom and preview depth of field in live view. Live view is also functional in movie mode.
Picture quality:
The camera is really nice for portraiture, giving a very even and true-to-life skin colors and tones. With respect to landscape and architectural photography the body is sharp, with good saturation producing really nice blues, greens and reds.
Positives:
-Excellent low light performance - this body is quite frankly the difference between a usable image and an unusable image in low-light situations. This is mission critical for the dimly lit churches and reception halls for wedding photographers or in other indoor candid situations.
-Photos from ISO 50-3200 are usable and have acceptably low noise. The occasional photo above ISO 3200 can be salvaged by going black & white.
-Battery life - the LP-E6 battery is a workhorse. I shoot 4,000-8,000 shots at a wedding and I have never ran out of battery using my BG-E6 grip with two LP-E6's.
-No on-camera flash - I loathe on-camera flashes. They don't work, they ruin pictures and they are flat out annoying. This is a professional quality body. On-camera flashes are for soccer moms and the annoying people who get in your way at weddings.
-Very well built, designed and organized.
Negatives:
-Microphone sound quality is not great. This is not a huge deal for me as I don't use the Mark ii for video.
-Would have liked more frames per second.
-The shutter has a very distinct sound - almost like a rubber band slapping a piece of aluminum foil. I don't care for the sound very much.
-AF points are all in relative center of frame, making it difficult to AF on elements outside of that spread.
Bottom line:
I am extremely happy with my two 5D Mark ii's. They are workhorses and are absolute necessities for my business. I give the camera a 4.5 out of 5 stars.
Yes, even used like the one I purchased.
You get a solid, tough camera but without the weight of the 5D Mark III. OK there are only 11 focus points but I only ever use the center focus anyway, and this is VERY sensitive. I think this alone blows away any comparison to the 5d Mark II.
Another great feature is the silent shutter mode, perfect if you dont want to make too much noise at a shoot.
I would say this camera is a modern upgrade to the 5d Mark II, bridging the gap between the signifcant cost of the 5d mark III.
Overall I am very happy!
Engineer Said took only 22million shutter. So I'm really upset.
That is very very (*100) not goods.
No more, Do not buy.
I know it is a lot of money but if you think about it the advantages of this camera is great and over time it will pay for its self by
giving you quality pictures, imadjin 25,600 ASA ISO and 22.3 mb can you really ask for more at such a super price here from this seller delivery only a small amount.
The best thing though is the speed that you get it mine came only after the third day from my order and well packed recorded.
I would highly recomend this seller and would definately buy from him again just give me a chance.
Nearly all the time I leave my ISO setting on AUTO with excellent results even in poor light , I won`t go into all the technical improvements as many others have already done so.
I bought mine from HDEW CAMERAS in Surry , England for £1889 with a 3 year warranty brand new - I would recommend anyone lokking for this body only to call them or check them out on line , you won`t be disappointed!
Their service is excellent - 24/48 courier delivery , for £10 extra (worth it) - to those people like myself that had their fingers burned on a previous purchase - these guys are the real deal.
I don`t get paid or have no connection to this company but I got what I paid for in a very short time!
It is my second. I use it for landscapes and portraits and the quality of the images are A1
Highly recommended - unless you need super-fast fps's then this is a great solid work-horse
My equipment:
Canon 5D MkIII
Sony A7R + Metabones Mark III
Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar T*
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fish-Eye USM
Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM ART
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM
Kenko 2.0X PRO 300 Teleconverter DGX
Rokinon/Samyang 500/1000mm F6.3 Mirror
Canon Speedlite 580EX II Flash
Canon MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite Flash
Canon Angle Finder C
Coming from the 60D (which is a stellar camera in its own right), I was blown away by this cameras Image Quality. With the 60D I found I could only use 50% crops for critical work. With the 5D Mark II, I found 100% crops were so detailed I could use them no problem. Additionally the low light capability wipes the floor with the 60D. The differences are night and day. With the 60D I would see noise creeping in at around 800 or so ISO. 1600 was the max I felt comfortable shooting in, with 3200 requiring heavy use of noise reduction software resulting in much less detail. With the 5D Mark 2 ISO 3200 is much better than the 60D's 1600 ISO. I can actually shoot at 6400 for less critical work and it looks much better than the 60D at 3200. The retention of detail and the way the camera squashes noise is very impressive. If you have the coin this camera is a rock star. However! The 5D Mark III is set to be announced on Feb 28th 2012 or within the week of Feb 28th 2012, so you may want to hold off and grab this sucker at a steal of a price. If you need the camera now, you wont be disappointed. Another thing to note.
Auto Focus:
I've read a lot of people complaining that this camera only has 1 cross type focus point. I want to say that most people use the center focus point anyway, so it really is a bit of an overblown issue.
Canon vs Nikon:
The D700 has better focusing. But unless you're doing sports this is a non issue. The low light is better than the Canon, but you only have 12.1 megapixels. It BETTER have better low light capabilities than the 5D Mark II. But honestly, at only 1/3rd of a stop better in low light giving up around 2x the resolution seems a bit silly. It is argued that the only time you will need the extra resolution is when printing billboard sized images. This does not factor in cropping at all. If you want to crop your 5d Mark II image to say 100% you can do that while maintaining stellar levels of detail. With the D700 you're left with a lot left detail. Another thing any prospective buyer should do is look at the prices and quality of their potential lenses. I would start at the 24-70, then the 70-200 to cover your zoom range. The canons being cheaper and the 70-200 IS II being MUCH better (probably the best lens on the market) Then compare primes, the Cannon has the 85 1.2 V2 vs the Nikkor.... 85 1.4? You can't find a Nikkor 1.2 and the Canon 1.2 is only ~$100 more than the 1.4 Nikkor. The canon has a 50 1.2 the Nikon has a 50 1.4. Again Nikkor doesn't even have a 1.2 lens.
One last thing about Nikon vs Canon. Movie mode. I know I know, but if you EVER want to record a movie, EVER, you cannot on a D700 and you get commercial level videos on the 5D Mark II. Not just adequate movies, but box office quality movies. That's a MASSIVE!!!! improvement.
I know a lot of people were initially disappointed that it did not have the headline grabbing specifications of the Nikon D800 but on closer inspection the changes are all that we really required.
In particular the AF system has been improved out of all recognition but then let's face it you could not get worse than 9 points with just one cross type point. The new system locks focus instantly even in the dimmest of light and it tracks objects as they move across the screen flawlessly. You can also set up different focus set ups for portrait and landscape just as you can in the 7D - that is very useful.
Other worthwhile improvements come in the speed that the camera achieves. Although I never found the MkII sluggish, the MkIII just feels snappier. I'm not a machine gun shooter so the increased frame rate is not important but the speed it writes to the card is. The DIGIC 5+ processor really is faster than the old DIGIC 4 it replaced just as Canon claim.
The addition of a second card slot is a great benefit. Although I have never had a card fail, I know plenty who have so the ability to record to two cards is good insurance.
The ability to shoot at even higher ISO speeds than with the MkII and still get clean results is a huge bonus to those like me who prefer natural light to flash.
There are also other subtle improvements like the lock on the mode dial, the quick menu button, a larger viewing screen which matches the normal format, 100% viewfinder and the start stop button for video.
Put these things together and they make the upgrade worthwhile.
UPDATE 5 weeks on and less than 700 pictures taken, the camera has developed Error 30 which means the shutter is stuck and needs replacing. Since it is outside the 30 days, I do not qualify for a replacement so will have to send it off to Canon for repair.






