Messages

First I have to apologize for writing this post. BUT..I have looked in this forum over and over again but cant find what ML can do with my 5DmkII. Obviusly, I have search the wrong thread for the info, and now I give up. Can someone please be kind and paste the link to the list that show what features ML have for 5DmkII? Please? I hardly never film with it but I heard ML have good thing for us who mainly shoot stills too.

Thank you!

Hi phunkyboy!

I ordered a Canon 5D mk II todday myself. I was in allmost the same position as you since I have had a 550D and now wanted to upgrade.

I think you have to ask yourself how much you can afford and what your purpose with the upgrade are. I allready had 3 L-lenses and felt it was time for me to take the next step. The cameras (5D mkII, 5D, mkII and 6D and 7D are all different cameras (as you know).

7D have the same sensor as your camera. It better built and have better pps (pics per second, is that how you say it in english?) and better AF.
6D is FF with a way better sensor, better AF than your 550D, two cardslots, 21 mp?, way better ISO stats and wifi built in (and more things offcourse)
5DmkII is FF, better ISO, 21 mp
5DmkIII is FF with a much better sensor and processor, 22 p instead of your 18 mp, way better AF (tests says is VERY good)and more pps (6), better AF in filmmode, better ISO.

This is what I thought about (in short terms). I asked myself what was important and what I normally used the camera for. Normally I dont have use for extremly good AF and high burst rate (pps). Sure its fun too shoot skateboarding and mountainbiking friends and take famillyphotos of the kinds playing in the garden etc. But for me, 95% of the pics dont need a fast AF and high amoount off pps. Therefore the 7D was out of the race since the only advantage was high pps and fast AF over my 550D.

Then it was the 3 FF cameras left.

The main difference in image quality between the 2 5D versions is that JPEG pics direktlly from the camera is better in MKIII and MKIII is better in ISO 12800 and over that. The AF is way better in MKIII and it have pps of 6 instead of 3,9 for MKII. For me who dont have so much use for the fast burstrate and allways take pics in raw it was a easy choice. The price here now for a MKII is 12999 SEK and for a MKIII its 26000-27000 SEK. No way that I pay twice as much foir that small difference (small for me, for others it might be a huge one).

6D costs 17999 SEK (aprox) and I couldnt see how I could have use for the small difference in image quality or that WIFI feature to make me pay 5000 SEK extra for it.

Thats how I thought! Make a priority list for yourself containing what you shall be using your camera for the next years and then ask yourself what camera that have the best specifications for that. And mayby also how much you are willing to pay for it depending on how thick your wallet is. But if you have more money then you need, I guess you havent had to ask for our opinion here..;-)

Good luck!