Canon 5D II concensus?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by bowzer, Jan 11, 2009.

  1. bowzer

    bowzer Guest

    Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this camera
    be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on par with, say,
    AF issues from past cams.
    bowzer, Jan 11, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bowzer

    N Guest

    "Larry Thong" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > bowzer wrote:
    >
    >> Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >> camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on
    >> par with, say, AF issues from past cams.

    >
    > Having never touched one, I can authoritatively say that all problems have
    > been corrected and the AF module is working at peak performance. The new
    > compression scheme for HD video makes it far superior to a dedicated video
    > cam. The firmware even made the weather sealing more robust. With all
    > these new improvements only an idiot would buy an A900 or D3x. Oh wait, I
    > bought one.
    >



    You bought an A900? What's the world coming to?
    N, Jan 12, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. bowzer

    bowzer Guest

    "Larry Thong" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > bowzer wrote:
    >
    >> Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >> camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on
    >> par with, say, AF issues from past cams.

    >
    > Having never touched one, I can authoritatively say that all problems have
    > been corrected and the AF module is working at peak performance. The new
    > compression scheme for HD video makes it far superior to a dedicated video
    > cam. The firmware even made the weather sealing more robust. With all
    > these new improvements only an idiot would buy an A900 or D3x. Oh wait, I
    > bought one.


    Wait, I thought only KR can publish "review/tests" of gear he's never
    touched? Are you actually KR?
    bowzer, Jan 12, 2009
    #3
  4. bowzer

    bowzer Guest

    "Matt Ion" <> wrote in message
    news:gkdoah$27s$...
    > bowzer wrote:
    >> Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >> camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on par
    >> with, say, AF issues from past cams.

    >
    > It still won't make popcorn. I've been bugging Canon for a firmware
    > update to address this since I got my first Digital Rebel. Arrogant
    > pricks, thinking they know how to make a camera.


    Clearly, this product is not ready for those of us who eat popcorn. But if I
    just stick to Cape Code Dark Russet chips, I should be OK, right? Love those
    chips.
    bowzer, Jan 12, 2009
    #4
  5. bowzer

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:42:47 -1100, D.Mac wrote:

    >> Does the "D" stand for "douchebag", or "dumbass"?

    >
    > Hey fuckwit... Who hatched you? It certainly wasn't anyone human.


    This is a digital photo newsgroup, where sibling battles are OT.
    ASAAR, Jan 13, 2009
    #5
  6. bowzer

    D.Mac Guest

    "bowzer" <> wrote in message
    news:hotal.179$...
    > Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    > camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on par
    > with, say, AF issues from past cams.


    The auto focus system of EOS cameras is flawed and no amount of patches from
    Canon seem to fix the problem. Middle distance focus is hard enough at the
    best of times but when your AF sensor send the lens to infinity when it
    should still be focused closer, you are forced to use a smaller (than f/2.8)
    aperture if you expect to be able to crop someone out of a group shot.

    Not good enough on a 20D, Even worse with a 40D and unforgivable with the
    shallower DOF of a FF sensor like the 5D has. If all you are buying one for
    is it's photographic ability, There are better offerings in the Nikon range.

    If you want it for it's "video" making ability you're a bigger fool than you
    should be.

    Douglas
    D.Mac, Jan 14, 2009
    #6
  7. bowzer

    SMS Guest

    bowzer wrote:
    > Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    > camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on par
    > with, say, AF issues from past cams.


    The alleged AF issues were way overblown. These were minor problems,
    easily solved in firmware.

    You can wait for Nikon to come out with the upgrade to the D700 which
    will likely be a worthy competitor to the 5D Mark II, but of course
    there could be early issues with it as well.
    SMS, Jan 14, 2009
    #7
  8. bowzer

    D.Mac Guest

    "George Kerby" <> wrote in message
    news:C591F9D8.1E840%...
    >
    >
    >
    > On 1/13/09 8:39 PM, in article gkh9gr$psu$, "D.Mac"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "bowzer" <> wrote in message
    >> news:hotal.179$...
    >>> Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >>> camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on par
    >>> with, say, AF issues from past cams.

    >>
    >> The auto focus system of EOS cameras is flawed and no amount of patches
    >> from
    >> Canon seem to fix the problem. Middle distance focus is hard enough at
    >> the
    >> best of times but when your AF sensor send the lens to infinity when it
    >> should still be focused closer, you are forced to use a smaller (than
    >> f/2.8)
    >> aperture if you expect to be able to crop someone out of a group shot.
    >>
    >> Not good enough on a 20D, Even worse with a 40D and unforgivable with the
    >> shallower DOF of a FF sensor like the 5D has. If all you are buying one
    >> for
    >> is it's photographic ability, There are better offerings in the Nikon
    >> range.
    >>
    >> If you want it for it's "video" making ability you're a bigger fool than
    >> you
    >> should be.
    >>
    >> Douglas
    >>

    > Does the "D" stand for "douchebag", or "dumbass"?


    Hey fuckwit... Who hatched you? It certainly wasn't anyone human.
    >
    D.Mac, Jan 14, 2009
    #8
  9. bowzer

    D.Mac Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 06:42:47 -1100, D.Mac wrote:
    >
    >>> Does the "D" stand for "douchebag", or "dumbass"?

    >>
    >> Hey fuckwit... Who hatched you? It certainly wasn't anyone human.

    >
    > This is a digital photo newsgroup, where sibling battles are OT.
    >


    And this from ASAAR?
    Wow! Is this part of a new year resolution or is someone else using your PC?
    D.Mac, Jan 15, 2009
    #9
  10. bowzer

    Paul Furman Guest

    bowzer wrote:
    >
    > "Larry Thong" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> bowzer wrote:
    >>
    >>> Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >>> camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on
    >>> par with, say, AF issues from past cams.

    >>
    >> Having never touched one, I can authoritatively say that all problems
    >> have been corrected and the AF module is working at peak performance.
    >> The new compression scheme for HD video makes it far superior to a
    >> dedicated video cam. The firmware even made the weather sealing more
    >> robust. With all these new improvements only an idiot would buy an
    >> A900 or D3x. Oh wait, I bought one.

    >
    > Wait, I thought only KR can publish "review/tests" of gear he's never
    > touched? Are you actually KR?


    I think you may be on to something :)
    Paul Furman, Jan 15, 2009
    #10
  11. In article <hotal.179$>, bowzer
    <> writes
    >Now that the firmware update has fixed the black dot issue, can this
    >camera be called "stable?" What I mean is no other glaring issues on
    >par with, say, AF issues from past cams.


    Depends what you mean by stable - there are glaring issues with it, but
    it is unclear whether these will ever be recognised by Canon or fixed,
    even if they can.

    Other "issues" with the 5D-II include:
    1. excessive purple fringing around highlights at the edge of the
    frame, especially with wide angle lenses. Apparently due to changes in
    the filter stack and the reduced density of the Bayer filters that Canon
    introduced on the 5DII to improve sensitivity.
    Probably not fixable in firmware.

    2. flash exposure is about 1-1.5 stops lower than the 5D (or other
    cameras supporting E-TTLII). This is fine when flash is used for fill
    only, since earlier cameras required around -1 to -1.5 stops of FEC, so
    the 5DII gives a good fill balance at 0 FEC. However it is completely
    wrong when there is little, or no, ambient light and flash is the main
    light source. This requires +1 to +1.5 FEC to get anywhere near the
    correct exposure, which is unacceptable when the camera itself only
    provides a complete range of +/-2 stops of FEC.
    Probably fixable in firmware, but will they? They seem to have made
    this change in response to people complaining about poorly balanced fill
    flash at 0 FEC on earlier cameras, so will claim its an improvement!

    3. loads of reports of poor build quality: parts coming off in the
    mirror box during use; lens connection error messages; flash units
    switching from E-TTL to basic TTL (which digital cameras don't even
    support) because of intermittent data connections.
    Probably fixable by getting better QA at the plant, but that costs money
    they can barely afford in this recession.

    4. uneven colour balance across the frame, with slight pink casts
    in the corners (possibly linked to the same effect that makes the purple
    fringing worse).
    Possibly fixable in firmware, using data from the lens.

    5. complete lack of a 25p video standard, so PAL compatible
    down-converts either jitter (due to dropping every 6th frame), blurring
    (due to averaging frames to get the required frame rate) or both.
    Probably fixable in firmware, but will they? Canon might view 25p as an
    additional feature rather than a big fix. Canon don't generally add new
    features to cameras as it involves reprinting or adding corrigenda pages
    to their manuals.

    None of that includes any of the things its just not very good at - like
    focussing using any but the central AF point: how very last century!
    --
    Kennedy
    Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
    A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
    Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
    Kennedy McEwen, Jan 17, 2009
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    418
  2. David J. Gilmour

    Canon ixus 400 or canon ixus 2 ?

    David J. Gilmour, Jul 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    534
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    832
  4. zxcvar

    Difference between Canon G5 and Canon S50

    zxcvar, Jul 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    399
    Roland Karlsson
    Jul 23, 2003
  5. Tony Sperling

    SP2 - any concensus among the regulars?

    Tony Sperling, Apr 9, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    763
    =?Utf-8?B?U3Zlbg==?=
    Apr 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page