What makes the canon 5d so good

Canon APS-C sensors have a 1. Full-frame image sensors are vital for creating wide-angle shots. Unfortunately, the latest full-frame DSLRs are expensive. They are made for professional shooters with professional-size budgets. Consider this: the 5d produced acceptable professional results in While shooting an event, I do not hesitate about using the 5d classic as a second body.

I am sure there are other photographers who continue to do the same. There are downsides. It only shoots 3fps. Using Artificial Intelligence, PortraitPro enhances every aspect of a portrait for beautifully natural results. This is particularly true is you are looking for an affordable way to upgrade to full-frame image quality. The difference in image quality will be hard to notice in online publication.

Or do you mean you would be curious to do the comparison? Both cameras are included in the comparison scene, so you can just select them to compare them to one another. Curious how the 5D is performing after a decate up to asa, if compared with the a7sII. This is curious. The 5D, somehow, still a great camera for some purposes. And has no market. Yeah it's curios to see that the 5D is so much sharper than the A7s II.

The difference is quite big. It's interesting to see that DPR never notices these things. Only the banding when pushing an exposure for 6 stops Still some working 5D out there sounds not very confident in terms of the life it the old lady.

Does it make sense to buy one used?? I want to go FF but cheap. Part of the issue was a defect with the mirror attachments that wiped out a lot of them. Canon did a service action. If your candidate was repaired it should be ok. Unfortunately, the classic has no shutter count so I picked one up for having been repaired, shelved, given to a nephew who was then selling it.

I'm thinking a safeish bet. It has been a fun adjunct to my 70D. Full frame is a different experience with EF lenses. I've been really impressed by the image quality. Yeah, not much crop on my 30" screen before 'whoops' but real world nice looking pictures from a solid, simple camera is fun.

As to the weak JPG engine Modern memory cards are so much bigger for the price why not shoot RAW. If mirrorless bodies were this expensive to upgrade then maybe there is a lesson there for Sony?

Oh, sorry, they have already learned it. Still some working 5D's out there? Yes, mine is one of them, Fantastic camera, I still use it regularly. I really enjoyed this article and to compare the 5D to other, so called more "modern" cameras. Still an impressive piece of tech! I bought the 5D when it came out, and would probably still have it today, were it not for it having been stolen during a trip to Xi'an just as the Mark II came out.

I've had the Mark II now long enough that perhaps I'll upgrade to the Mark IV when the pricing comes down a bit, though it does a very good job for my purposes.

Yes, lenses are never that sharp on Mk2 and 3 as they are on Mk1. This is partly due to resolution and partly to AAF. I have long looked at 5D's. This article has me thinking again. Well done. I have owned a couple of the little brother 30D. Looking back of my shots, the 8 MP 30D still has some of the best looking images. OK, for future Throwbacks, how about the Canon Pro 1? I still have one it's 6. When brought out, the early review models had a number of problems that were mostly worked out over the next two years.

Early ones had AF issues, fixed by the new firmware; the early ones vignette at certain combinations of focal length and aperture, and they eventually got that right. The differences between the earliest and last production is quite significant. Unfortunately nearly all the reviews were done on the earliest build and give a false picture of what a good one can do. DPR, set the record straight with a re-review of a late production Pro 1.

Go one better : The Canon Pro90 IS - so far ahead of its time then and perhaps well and truly past time now. The Pro1 had a better lens, and perhaps a better build, but no IS and I doubt if it was really a success as there was an enormous fire sale at the end of its run. While you can't get it repaired by Canon, there are tons of legit brick and mortar repair shops which will repair them, want any piece of the guts you need for repairs?

Aliexpress is choke full of repair parts for the 5D classic. In terms of colour rendering, from raw, now using the 6D, I can't still able to achieve the same result I was achieving using the 5D classic. Don't ask me why, but the 5D classic, using the lightroom 5, leaved me with beautiful pictures.

I have a Sony A7 and a 5D and I can easily spot the richer files from the two, and always wins the 5D :. I do wish Canon made a true 5 megapixel 5d version for wedding photographers who don't need 50mp.

We want lower noise in the darker venues and I think that would be an ideal resolution with huge pixels capturing dim light. The megapixel race is stupid. Make it 8 megapixels and I would be perfectly happy. I am with you that the megapixel race is annoyingly dumb. Of course I did. Here is my angle of view: I would not shoot past ISO with about any camera.

Therefore, better performance at ISO 50k or k is irrelevant to me, no matter how many stops better than other cameras. To me it looks rather that way that Sony handles some noise performance for weaker CFA, giving poorer color. Once you kick colors - saturation and contrast up to the comparable level, you are at the noise performance of the oldschool Canon 6D or Nikon D and up.

A gooood solution to downscale the pixels, is the adobe dng convertor, in batch we can shrink the resolution. I don't know why ppl dont consider this easy software. Personally I wont scale from 20mpx to 16, like the 6D D5, 1DX exc maybe not, but for the next gen sensors, I'm keen to shrink from 46 mpx to a decent resolution, especially for weddings.

IMO 16 mpx, plus additional post cropping, are more than enough. It is good to see Canon cut back on MP at last. Thats what most photography wants, 50MP is wayyy too much for just 35mm sensor size really!

Believe me, all of them are giving us what we are paying for. Very well just seen some samples they provided recently, it is looking promising regarding to DR, shadow noise, it is much better than previous 1DX. It keep getting better all the time. Looks like Canon is pretty much catching up real fast behind Sony.

Just look how ugly looks a white man face from 5d2 and 5d3 compared to 5dc. Studio scene, comp size. And there they are again, those perfectly balanced images in terms of pleasing colors. I don't know what Canon and Adobe did back then, but they sure made images look better from scratch. There was a warmer, almost filmlike Fuji-touch which is more obvious now when comparing with todays super-contrasty profiles and - to be honest - not always great colors.

After the race for higher resolution and higher ISO performance drove both manufacturers to progressively weaken the CFA's in their later cameras to allow more light to reach the sensor at the expense of color fidelity. My 5D is still going strong. The only serious problem it ever had was an unresponsive shutter button - probably gummed up with sweaty filth - that I fixed with a tablespoon of rubbing alcohol poured down through the battery compartment there are how-to videos about this around the web.

I have a battery grip for it that I don't use because I over-tightened the screw mechanism to the point breakage. The 5D is still a good camera, though. Thanks DPReview for the throwback. Back in the day, I drooled over the 5Ds owned by the professionals I met. At that time, I still hadn't made the jump to large sensor cameras. I'd look at the 5D images on the internet, and dream of the day I'd go full frame. And yeah, I did. Canon 5D Mark II. Then the Leica M9. It was glorious.

Heck, I'm even toting the Pana LX7 with its tiny sensor all the time. Full frame cameras just aren't quite small enough for me yet. I eventually gave mine to a fellow retiree, pro. He loves it. Explaining the Leica M9 is pointless. You know it. I'm been a Leica collector and probably own 30 and as many lenses. It's not everyday. I exercise the old bodies but do much work with them.

I don't really likE EVR. I've this as buying tools. I have a lot of lenses for it. Rishi, see what I mean!???? Very good shadow performance from the 6D!

Odd this came out after we went back and forth on it a little which was fun btw. I still remember the first time I looked into the 5D's viewfinder. Never mind the photos it took — coming from the D, that was enough to persuade me to buy one!

I no longer have my original 5D — it was stolen from my checked luggage on an overseas flight. Lesson learned. All my gear goes in carry-on now.

Have you ever seen how your luggage is handel by the ground crew? It's thrown, hit by other luggage, etc. Even the best photobag will struggle with that stress.

I would never ever check in my photo gear, always carry it with me. I never skimped on the bubble wrap, along with a few pairs of socks and very careful placement in the centre of the bag surrounded by plenty of soft clothing, so I never had a problem there.

I only ever used to put my older backup camera in my checked luggage; all the rest of my gear always went in my carry-on. I read somewhere that thefts from checked luggage went through the roof when mandatory screening of luggage started soon after September 11, So I guess it's something we have the terrorists to thank for. Still have my 5D but have not used it in several years. While I love the pictures it helped me create, mine had serious sensor dust issues. The sensor dust drove me to purchase a 5D II.

Although I no longer use my 5D, I will never let it go. A peerless, capable, gloriously simple imaging tool in its day. I could still use it for at least a third of what I shoot today. I had a 1DsII for a while and preferred the direct simplicity of the 5D. I feel like downsizing the images at base ISO for comparison is a little misleading in terms of image quality. It would be better to also offer an option to upscale the 5D to 50mp to better compare low-ISO noise.

The smaller equivalent resolution is important when talking about 50mp not really being "worse" in every measurable way which some people still dispute amazingly but doesn't actually show the noise improvement of more modern sensors given a more detailed requirement.

Sometimes When it's enough, you can downsample a 50mp sensor simple enough. When it's not, you won't like the pixel-level noise of up-sampling it. This is seen with large prints but also with crops, especially at the telephoto end of life where lenses are never long enough. I'd say 12mp is virtually always enough. At the very least, That's just not valid to me at telephoto lengths.

If nothing else, high quality resolution allows you to bring a much smaller piece of glass. I can certainly see the value of cropping while doing wildlife shooting or trying to lighten the load while hiking in to a good spot. The best way to crop an image is to crop the sensor in the first place.

Maybe it's all in my head, but out of all the dozens of digital cameras I've owned and used, the original 5D gave me the files that I thought were the "prettiest" for lack of a better superlative. There have been plenty of cameras that measure better but there are no other images that give me a jaw drop reaction upon opening to full resolution as consistently as my 5D images.

Yes, that legendary skin tone, and the non-clinical look, holds something special for me too. Whenever I feel like I need something special, I still break out that camera to capture some images with that special look.

Have a couple 2'x3' canvas prints from ye olde 5D hanging on the wall. Good times. Such a coincidence! I still use the 5D and there's indeed a lot I can do with the pictures when exposed for the maximum amount of latitude with RAW image editing in Lightroom. The photos look very good to me, although when not exposed enough banding can be a problem when I want to preserve detail in the shadows. Other than that I love it's rich colours and sharpness. I like a camera that is just for shooting stills with no more bells and whistles than necessary, the 5D fits this bill while image quality is still really decent to get great results.

How about doing an article on the fake Canon made by Kodak that I believe was the inspiration for the original 5D in the first place? Opting for Dual Pixel Raw mode, however, which nearly doubles the size of the image file, will knock the buffer capacity down even further, so we don't recommend that mode for any sort of action shooting scenarios.

Autofocus performance is also very good and up-to-snuff for a professional-class DSLR. Offering an updated point AF system with wider AF point coverage, both single-shot AF and continuous focus is great. Even with difficult subjects, such as with indoor college-level basketball, the 5D Mark IV was able to keep up without issue.

Live View AF is nearly instantaneous for stationary subjects and also works great for video recording. Full HD video is there too of course, up to 60p, while p video can crank up to fps. Overall, the 5D Mark IV offers a range of video features, appropriate for casual videographers as well as more advanced cinematography workflows.

While this allows for very high-quality footage which does, in fact, look great , the file sizes are huge, and the inherently high bitrate of around Mbps can really bog down even quite powerful computers. We had trouble with smooth video playback of 4K footage even on fairly modern, quad-core, nearly maxed-out computers.

Also be aware there is a 1. As mentioned, 4K video looks great, with tons of fine detail and great colors, even up to higher ISOs around , but it's definitely worth a thought as to whether or not you need 4K before you hit 'record. The increase in image resolution is a nice upgrade, bringing the 5D Mark IV more in-line with a number of competing full-frame cameras. Image quality, at both low and higher ISOs, is great, and the camera is nimble and responsive with fantastic autofocus.

For still photography, the 5D Mark IV is undoubtedly a highly versatile camera that's capable of shooting a variety of subject matter in all sorts of lighting conditions. Overall, while it looks like a 5D Mark III, the design of this new model is refined, well thought-out, and most of all familiar, which to a seasoned professional is exactly what he or she wants and needs. They need a tool, and the 5D Mark IV is an excellent one, for photography as well as for video.