Review of the Canon EOS 5D Mark II camera specially for Radozhiva prepared Roman Kurbatov.
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Oddly enough, the Radojuva website still does not have a review of this camera, it's time to fix this annoying flaw.
So, Canon EOS 5D Mark II. A legendary camera in the opinion of some (oh, this esoteric COLOR), hopelessly outdated in the opinion of others. The “two” appeared 12 years ago - an eternity by the standards of modern technology. And, having appeared, in a sense, it made a revolution. Even earlier, the no less legendary "one" (aka 5D Classic) burst into the market for a relatively affordable full frame, showing that this is the prerogative of not only professional studio and reportage cameras. (Subsequently, the 5D line kept getting more expensive and more complicated, until the same niche - the available FullFrame was already occupied by 6D). And the "two" has already set the trend for semi-professional solutions, together with their descendants, becoming the main tool of photographers - "bombing" - weddings and correspondents who shoot ordinary subjects that are not related to sports, war and natural disasters and do not require top 1D. But most importantly, the Mark II swung to the sacred - to video filming.
"Soap boxes" allowed you to shoot short videos even before, and in DSLRs, capturing (not shooting) video became possible using external devices thanks to the LiveView mode, but full video recording, and even in FullHD format, first appeared in the 5D Mark II, very much liked by many. As for weddings, who could earn extra money by working as cameramen, and for film studios, which received a pretty decent camera for ridiculous, by the standards of the film industry, money. The 5D Mark II was used in some scenes for blockbusters such as Captain America and Iron Man 2, selected episodes of House and 24, and the low-budget debut film Finding Sonny was first filmed entirely on this camera. The 12 minute cut length limit is not a big problem for movies, as rarely does a take last longer than this.
Such recognition from videographers can do a disservice to those who want to buy a used camera now, since a camera with a minimum "mileage" in the form of the number of shutter releases may have a matrix "killed" by video lovers. By the way, for the same reason, I do not risk using my "deuce" as a webcam. Yes, the image quality is very high, but the camera heats up noticeably and the life of the matrix is definitely reduced. The 5D Mark II is not directly supported by the recently released EOS WebCam Utility, but thanks to its LiveView, it can be used for this on Linux thanks to third-party utilities.
In principle, the 5D line continues to be used in the world of cinema to this day, if not for video shooting, then for the so-called. timelapse scenes - a sequence of individual frames shot at large time intervals or in motion or stop-motion - with “flying around” a frozen scene. In the latter case, a large number of cameras are used, arranged in a semicircle and filming the scene from different angles with a slight difference. Sequential inclusion of frames that were captured at the same time creates the illusion of a frozen picture. They do something similar when shooting miniatures. And if for the series The Mandalorian we only know that to shoot the miniature of the spacecraft used in the film, only one of the cameras of the 5D line (possibly Mark II) was used. 12 years in the service of Hollywood - the camera is definitely too early to write off.
Briefly about the characteristics of the camera. Full-frame sensor, honest 36 x 24 mm (the first "five" lacked a fraction of a millimeter to the full frame, 35,8 x 23,9). 21.1 megapixel - quite a bold pixel at a pretty decent resolution. The ISO range is 100-6400 (the first five had 1600, which is clearly not enough by today's standards), it is software expandable up to 50-25600. 3200 and 6400 can hardly be called "working", but with some post-processing they are quite acceptable.
The display is slightly larger than that of its predecessor and, according to reviews, is much better. Perhaps I was not very lucky with the copy, because the display of my camera is somewhat colder in colors. Since I shoot exclusively in RAW, it doesn't matter - you can always tweak the color temperature in post-processing, but you shouldn't be guided by the screen to judge scene colors. Although the color itself (more precisely, the color temperature and tint) has to be corrected extremely rarely, mainly for artistic purposes - the sensor is practically not mistaken.
Unlike its predecessor, the camera uses the LP-E6 battery, which is standard for the entire semi-professional line - all dual-digit cameras work with it, starting with 60D, the 6D, 7D lines, as well as the new EOS R mirrorless cameras. At one time this factor became a determining factor for me when choosing between the 5D Classic and 5D II. Another important difference is dust and moisture protection. It's not as good as the subsequent cameras in the series, but it does, which makes the two a pretty decent option for a traveling full-frame camera.
The autofocus module does not seem to have changed compared to its predecessor. It's still the same phase nine-point autofocus with 6 additional (non-selectable points). I would not call it problematic, rather inconvenient to use and very inferior to modern professional and semi-professional models (especially the luxurious 7D Mark II module, which covers almost the entire frame). Although for fans of shooting with manual lenses, this criterion is unlikely to be decisive.
There is only one slot for memory cards, cards of the rapidly aging CompactFlash format are used. There is an important nuance here. My camera froze when trying to shoot a video with a SanDisk card and later on the forums I came across information about the incompatibility of the 5D Mark II with the card controllers of this manufacturer when shooting video. Photos are taken without restrictions. With the second card - Transcend - this did not happen. If you are going to buy yourself a “deuce”, and to it a memory card, this point should be taken into account.
An option for this particular camera model is the BG-E6 battery grip, which duplicates all controls, only for vertical orientation. It makes the camera look like the reportage monsters from the 1D line and adds solidity to the photographer in the eyes of others, and in addition allows you to double the battery capacity or use AA AA size AA batteries (in the amount of six pieces) instead. For work in a studio, an exotic WFT-E4 II module may be useful, which looks like a battery pack, but in addition to an additional battery and duplicate buttons, it also gives the ability to connect to the camera via Wi-Fi and Ethernet.
Considering the fact that the screen of the entire 5D line is not rotatable, you can also pay attention to the Canon Angle Finder - an optical device that fits into the viewfinder eye and allows you to shoot, for example, macro from ground level, looking through the eyepiece from above and magnifying the image for better focus ... Working with a tripod will be much easier with it.
All in all, from the totality of its characteristics, we can say that the 5D Mark II has everything necessary to become the first full-frame camera and even now represents a certain value. Specifically, my copy, apparently, was operated quite tough. Two weeks after buying an inexpensive second-hand copy, I discovered that the USB connector (by the way, mini-USB, in the form of a trapezoid, and not the newer flat micro-USB) had stopped working. I decided to take the camera to the service along with a freshly bought battery pack with a sticky scroll wheel, and after opening it, it turned out that the camera was most likely drowning. Part of the board was covered in rust, and the USB connector was soldered. The camera was revived and despite such treatment in the past, it continues to work flawlessly for the second year. Old Jupiter, Mir or Helios, as well as any ancient Canon EF lens type 20 / 2.8, 24 / 2.8 (non IS), 28 / 1.8, 35/2 (non IS), 50 / 1.4, 85 / 1.8, 135 / 2.8 SF, pancake 40 / 2.8 or any of the many tilt-shift lenses, in general, everything that was designed for film, thanks to the large pixel, will be very appropriate on two pads.
Nothing prevents you from using the camera in a budget studio for staged static photos, and with some 17-40 / 4L the camera may well become the main tool of a landscape photographer for very modest money. For those whose budget is limited, but want to try premium technology, it is worth looking towards the old "elek" - 20-35 / 2.8L, 80-200 / 2.8L and even conventional zooms.
Recently, Arkady posted a note that caused a lot of responses about the number of lenses necessary and sufficient to solve most photographic problems. Aside from sports and on-the-scene reporting, where burst speed, AF tenacity and ease of use, and extremely high ISO operation come to the fore, the 5D Mark II can be considered the smallest full-frame camera, sufficient for any applications: from amateur astrophotography to underwater photography. This is a kind of watershed of "DSLRs", where the life of the camera will be interrupted, rather, by physical degradation than obsolescence, and buying a new camera will require asking about the expediency of investments, especially for amateur purposes. Yes, the cameras of the next generations introduced enough innovations that significantly increase the convenience of working with them - powerful autofocus, an informative viewfinder with levels, higher working ISOs, but it is unlikely that each of these new capabilities or their combination will allow the photographer (and their absence will prevent) shooting worthy shot.
You will find more reviews from readers of Radozhiva here.
No offense to the author ... But Arkady's reviews are very far away, especially examples of photos.
Not impressed by the cats? Persuaded, for a review of 7D2 I will not be too lazy to go to the Lviv piece of iron.
Nice pictures, don't worry))) We just have a typical critEg in front of us.
What does “critEg” have to do with it? I objectively assess the difference in the quality of the material. He didn't say anything offensive. The text is like a description of a product from an online store, the photos are like taken on a phone. Try to prove me otherwise, especially by looking at the reviews of Arkady.
I have terrible reviews and terrible photos. Once upon a time it is not necessary. But comparison is out of place here. The author has his own style.
Why did you decide that I have to prove something to you?
The review is normal, lively, although short, the photos are not bad.
And the critics - they are, yes.
The photo was not inserted into the previous comment, so something like this:
https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/get-zen_doc/50129/pub_5af1915c8c8be36795a8509d_5af191d87ddde87673762298/scale_1200
Black cat, admittedly great :)
But in general, this is a home camera, it did not go anywhere with me more than a hundred km from Lviv. Given my age and condition, I would not want to be left without a camera, and it’s a bit stressful to drag two on trips with me, so there’s nothing to brag about with it.
Good text, normal photos. In general, offset!
I liked the review, the author is a rep. It's hard to write about a camera that's new for so many years, it's easier of course to lie on the couch and wait for Arkady to brighten up your leisure
Good 5d Mark 2 camera, but poor autofocus. Does not focus stable or may not focus at all. It is bad in low light, often simply does not focus. I switched from 5d mark2 to 6d and did not regret it. Autofocus is much better, faster, more sensitive. All lenses focus without problems. There is less noise at high ISO. Only the paint on the carcass of the six is erased by itself. After a short time of use and wearing in a bag and on a belt, the camera looks like it was rubbed against the asphalt!)) The five did not have such problems. And I have never seen anything like this before, but shot with many cameras.
AF module 1Ds_mk2 behaves in a similar way in low light.
There are no complaints about the AF module on 1Ds_mk3.
PMSM, in poor light, the boots up to, probably, 5d3 and 6d were all dull and slow.
And for the side ones, and in general, sometimes there was longing, the first piglets were completely half-blind.
It got in the way, but not critical.
In the end, in those days Nikon was considered a specialist in reporting, and, I would say, for the d300s and top FFs this was very true.
Yes, today it's very big to run into a killed pyadvak, the camera was VERY popular with bombers of various levels, and they hardly felt sorry for it, blowing off the dust particles. Most likely, the cameras will be after the second or third owner with a murky history.
Although the camera was made with a noticeable margin of safety, many copies run in 500+ because. and they don't think about dying (this is in contrast to the d700, although I like the XNUMX more :)))
I switched to a nickle with 40D. After 3200 maximum ISO it was nice to see 4000 in the viewfinder and not worry about the picture) But autofocus is the bottom, especially in the dark. Where 40d focused without question, the penny crawled for a long time and could not focus.
If you shoot action during the day, you can roll ML and expand the focus areas: so at least somehow you can work.
I also want to note the very loud shutter sound, a year ago I was filming a children's music competition in a small room - I had to quickly buy 5d3, because the children were out of rhythm))
Thanks for the review! It would be nice to attach the photo source (wish)
What exactly is the 5D Mark II used. Whereas the Mandalorian is filmed on one of the "stamps", from the 2nd to the 4th (hardly the first). But this is more and more a Stop Motion technique, as described here - https://radojuva.com/2016/09/tim-burton-s-corpse-bride/, not video. For the video itself, a lot of more adapted solutions appeared.
I'll put the sources on a google disk in the evening and give a link.
Thank you
Very interesting and great pictures.
By today's standards, this is an old piece of shit. All that is valuable in this camera is only a full frame, there is nothing special about it. Overvalued in the market. The screens of the mrrghikh are semi-dull, or blue (hello, galimous party). There is nothing interesting in this camera that could help the photographer right now.
This “old piece of Mr.” can give a head start of three heads to the “new piece of Mr.” in the form of 250d, 2000d, 1300d and others like them, at equal or less cost, so I would beware of “overvalued”.
Of course, leaving aside the whistle-blowing and comparing the main thing - reliability and picture. Don't you take the camera for the picture?
Soryan, but the cost of the second dime on the secondary is really overpriced, and this is a fact. For its cost, you can also buy a Nikon D7100 there, which will be better in almost everything (dynamic range, autofocus, display, speed). At high ISOs, Canon is certainly a little better, but what's the point in that when already at dusk its autofocus is completely inoperative? If you choose between a slightly more grainy frame, and a frame with a focus miss, then the choice is obvious, I think)).
Yes, only the picture of the d7100 will be much worse, but who cares about this in cameras, right?)
Either I was lucky with cameras, or I don’t understand anything in the picture ... But I replaced the 1100D with a 7D II - naturally, I noted the increased convenience of work and the larger size of the picture and I don’t want to go back. But the picture itself ... 17-55 / 2.8 is an order of magnitude better than the 18-55 / DC III in the picture. But to tell me to notice how the picture has changed on the existing lenses - I do not see a fundamental difference.
The wife has 200D. 18-55 / 4STM, the last one is already quite good. Very good for a whale, especially for a whale of this size. But again, the PICTURE?
The 5D2 is good with a full frame, good with a huge viewfinder and surpasses all three of the mentioned crop in noise at high ones. Old full-frame lenses behave differently on it, all the way to try out the medium format Industar. But again - a picture? There is light, there is a frame - there is a picture. No light, no frame - well, the experience will allow you to shoot something not quite ordinary, well, the lens will not let you spoil this not quite ordinary. But the picture, the color - I can't describe it and I don't understand.
It is not entirely clear what kind of fundamental change in the picture you expected when moving from 1100 to 7d2 :)
You are the author of the note Do you really see the difference, owning both cameras, in the picture between 7d2 and 5d2? (yes, I know that it is sometimes difficult to guess which is which from individual "comparisons" on the Internet, but having both options in hand, the difference is quite evident)
Smoother tonal transitions, denser color (without stalling into clipping), a more detailed image on the same lenses than on a crop, lower HA level (the pixel is larger on fefe, as a rule), and the nature of the lens pattern is different due to the use of those areas, that is not affected on the crop, this is even without taking into account the notorious "work iso more on the stop" and small depth of field.
In general, as I understand it, talking about it is not worth talking about. Who sees this difference - he sees, who does not want to see - he does not want to :) To argue about this is pointless.
Hello. Maybe you can help me. I shot on a crop, Canon 700d, I liked everything, I basically mastered it in a couple of years, I wanted more. I bought a canon 5d2. There is a problem with erosion. Constantly you need to introduce exposure correction, from minus 2 stops to one. Otherwise, the frames are overexposed. At the same time, in live view, everything is approximately the same. What is it? Scorched matrix, or am I missing something? I like the photos from it, I don't want to sell, but logically, the automatic metering in a camera of this level should not be so wrong. Latest firmware. I don't know where to dig.
Are the exposure parameters in liveview different? Often the settings include exposure meter correction. Also, the measurement method will greatly affect the result.
The fact of the matter is that when switching to live view, you have to return the exposure correction to zero (or greatly reduce it to about 1/3 stop). The camera cannot be so wrong at 95 percent. scenes when shooting in normal mode. In this case, always in the direction of overexposures. I tried different types of metering, reset the settings to the factory settings - nothing helps.
The camera uses a special metering sensor when shooting through the viewfinder and calculates the image from the entire matrix when shooting through LiveView, so the indicators vary.
Try playing with the metering modes, shoot a dozen different shots in all four modes in sequence and compare the results. Stop on the one that will lie the least. I shoot at evaluate metering, but portraits are often better shot in spot mode so that the face is not underexposed.
[8C.Fn II -4: Auto Lighting Optimizer
Brightness)] (p. 177) is set to a setting other than [3: Disable],
the image may look bright even when the reduced
exposure compensation or exposure compensation when shooting
with flash (pp. 103, 105).
This is the only thing I can advise
Oh, these "flower growers" are full-frame? Lord. It is a disease like audiophilia.
2max:
Well, in principle, if "audifilia" is called the desire to listen to music on budget, but normal speakers, instead of a one-watt pocket buzzer, then yes, the comparison is in the subject :-)
I am always wondering what does “overpriced” mean in such cases?
The camera is a tool, the result depends on the person in whose hands it works.
Do you get UG from her? Alas, you get mine from any camera.
Resale is always an indicator of the real picture.
If you don’t want it, don’t take it, since then there has been an uncountable shmurdyak riveted, choose.
No, well, for example, there was at one time a rise in prices for the 40s of Helios, when they were given for really big money - a legend. It happens that such a veil of legendaryness is created, as the same first penny - a bold pixel, legendary color - must be taken. But in general, yes, if you don't want to - you don't take it, you take what suits you personally.
Better ush 5d m2 than d7100, the crop it is, no matter how new it is.
A piece of Mr., you say?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhGNhZMk4sE
Unfortunately, the 5D2 does not come with Lara Jade to help the photographer :(
Yes, there is generally a complete ass with the delivery set.
No hands, no head ...
It was an excellent camera for its time, EvGESHA. And now you can shoot on it.
The second penny is an unconditionally excellent camera for the amateur photographer.
With a huge fleet of optics, which Canon has been rolling out for a third of a century for all occasions, it is difficult to imagine an amateur task that could not be solved with this machine. There would be money for optics.
Roman, have you ever used the Canon EF 20mm f / 2.8 USM? I read from Comrade Ken about the tricky system of curved depth of field in this lens. It became interesting, but none of the familiar "gunners" with a full shot on such things did not go broke.
I have a 20 / 2.8, I bought it for this camera first of all, because I did not have a full frame width. A very peculiar lens, but I like it, I also plan to write a review on it. Go through the pictures, then that with a mark of 20 mm - everything was shot on it. Some of them require post-processing due to VERY strong vignetting, but some of the plots are the opposite.
So I understood correctly what kind of “20 mm” it is)
Shirik, I believe, must be original.
I don’t ask about sharpness and other dregs, because in principle it is not important. Another question.
I am very interested in this clever system of the backward curved field of focus at 20 / 2.8. With my 17-40, I often shoot landscapes at the same focal points, coming close to the main objects in the frame - for normal filling of the frame and a maximum of merrymaking with perspective.
There is an option in the future to give 17-40 to especially needy younger relatives.
Will this glass go as an easy replacement, or not give up 17-40?)
I don't know where Rockwell got the term and he gets kicked for it all the time. It's just a very poorly corrected curvature of the field, here it is necessary to Rodion for more detailed explanations. I'll try as I understand it.
The objective lens is a part of a sphere of a certain radius. For a wide angle, this radius is very small. Accordingly, the depth of field does not have the shape of a conventional parallelepiped bounded by two planes, but a complex figure located between spheres of larger and smaller radii. They are trying to fix this flaw in some way and bring everything back to the plane (they especially try with macro lenses). But for 20 / 2.8 everything was left as is. That is, if you shoot flat brickwork, then the corners will be soapy, I don’t know who (but in fact fall into the blur area). But after all, we do not remove brickwork, especially wide, we remove something arranged in a certain way.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/timjoannides/37430049586/in/pool-1432805@N23/ - for example, a pipe. At aperture 5. Focus somewhere in the center, in the distance. On a field-corrected lens, there would be an area at the center point and some piece of wall to the left and right of it, very narrow - it's far away. Well, or everything from the center to the horizon, if it is hyperfocal, but it would not save us, this is the very center of the frame, everything is very difficult to see. But on the width in general, and on this in particular, the sharp area, when focusing on a central point located in the distance, approaches us as we move away from the center and more or less follows the contours of this pipe. Yes, it’s not perfectly sharp, but it’s not as blurry as it should have been if we had shot it on a telephoto camera.
So it turns out that for this lens you need to carefully select the scenes, but in most scenes for the width, this drawback is more to our advantage.
Strange you. If for you in the width of the field is dregs.
An amateur task where 5dM2 was not enough for me is very simple - to shoot the northern lights.
Probably, you need to raise your skill - other photographers very successfully shoot the northern lights exactly on the second penny :)
What did you lack for this in this cell?
Geographic latitude, perhaps.
Arkady, I would like to express my gratitude to you for maintaining this blog. As for the coverage of topics from the amateur photography sphere, there are few such resources at all.
As I can see, reviews from readers have been gaining momentum lately.
I think that I could also make some significant contribution to the development of the case. Whatever one may say, many newcomers drop in here, and some of them may be faced with the same question that I once solved.
For example, at the moment I have the first penny in my personal use. And two zooms: Canon EF 17-40 / 4 L and Canon EF 70-200 / 4 L. As far as I know, they have not been presented here yet. But at the same time, they are extremely accessible on the secondary market, so someone may come in handy for their next review to make a decision “for” or “against”.
If I am able to collect enough visual material to the best of my strength and skills during the breaks between work, and to endure an objective text, will it be possible to publish this case?
Just write a review and send it by mail, in my opinion everyone does it :)
No problem. I am in favor of sharing my experience with the photo community.
By the way, an interesting topic was touched upon at FB in the framework of the well-established concept of “videographers kill the matrix”. I have not found any objective evidence for this. There are reports of hot-dead pixels, but I don't shoot with long exposures. There is information that the overheated matrix as a whole makes more noise, but this effect disappears after cooling. It seems that this is another unconfirmed bike, and the fact that Canon, with the beginning of the pandemic, offers its software that turns DSLRs and mirrorless cameras into webcams, only confirms that such exploitation will not kill them.
"... that Canon, with the outbreak of the pandemic, offers its software that turns DSLRs and mirrorless cameras into webcams, only confirms that such exploitation will not kill them." Are you talking about a company that makes money from the sale of New technology, and not about Santa Claus? Your input and output are not related in any way.
Exactly. Because if it turns out that such exploitation really kills the matrices (and they do not treat components with a certain resource as a gate), they will be hit with a solid lawsuit and they will have to recall the goods and replace them at their own expense. Marx died long ago, get this stuff out of your head. Wild capitalism, which the scoop so feared and feared, came only to its territory.
The entire "resource" passes with the expiration date of the warranty, it is unlikely that the matrix, even actively used in the video, will not be able to live up to this date, and no one promised that the devices will work for 10 or more years.
Well, we just agreed that no one saw an illustration of exactly how matrix degradation occurs as a result of video shooting. So that the matrix is not burned out by the light from the laser show or from the shooting of the Sun, separate dead-hot pixels do not appear, namely, it systematically died ... Well, I don't know there, the stripes have gone, noises at normal exposures, the color somehow ceased to suit with skin tone cats were no longer happy.
There is a "warranty period" and they are responsible for it, but the fact that you or someone else on the used equipment will not have something the way you expected - the manufacturer does not care much. Your fiery speech would have been interesting just in ancient times (since you remembered Marx), when people (and not only in the USSR), as a rule, had a television and a refrigerator from technology for life. Now the majority of household appliances in the apartment are much more than is really necessary. And the tales of the legendary reliability of brands and inevitable retribution to a negligent manufacturer, sung with religious fanatical fervor, will not get through anyone. You will come to the service in a year and they will explain to you how twice two - this device is out of production and there are no spare parts, no batteries, etc., plus you did not operate it as you should and this is written under the conditions of that very guarantee ...
Plus, of course, you will need to prove that the defect is caused by a factory defect, and not by the fact that, for example, you hammered nails with a camera. They write about this in the warranty coupons.
Regarding the second brand, which I own, among other cameras, a few years ago I was deliberately puzzled and found a set of spare parts for repairs (the shutter and mirror box are new, the rest is disassembled). and service software and other equipment are already there. so I can repair my camera until I get bored))
By the way, yes. The video has been filmed for years and nothing becomes of the matrices, recently I almost bought a D7100 with a mileage of 16000, so there the entire body is erased to magnesium, all the white letters on the buttons are worn out, obviously either the mileage is twisted, or the videographer used it. But when I took a picture on my D100 with the lid closed, it was something - just a constellation of dead pixels, I urgently had to look for software for remaping)
Good overview. The camera experience is excellently described. That's how it is, in fact. I myself use 5d2 as an additional camera and I don't think to change it yet.
The camera is a little more than perfect. Yes, there are problems with the display, it needs to be replaced and then color-calibrated, although its resolution will remain low anyway, which sometimes causes problems. AF is not very accurate in low light, but better than any crop from the same model year. I have no problems with noise at high ISO and with color in good light. ML works and helps when shooting with manual optics. The battery pack is also useful and balances the camera well when shooting at 80-200 2.8L. Sometimes there are different problems, but they are not so scary. You can live. The overall reliability of the camera is very high, I've seen copies with a mileage of 3 million on one shutter.
thanks to Roman for the review
Arkady at the beginning of the article, two links “Canon EOS 5D” lead to a review of the first dime. What for?)))
Some links are automatic according to the specified text. The text 'Canon EOS 5D' is included in the text 'Canon EOS 5D Mark II'. Fixed.
A great indestructible workhorse. I took it for a test from a friend and thought about buying it, but did not dare precisely because of the popularity of the subject among wedding bombs.
take it to the ASC and ask to check. nothing complicated.
When it is in your city, then yes. In ours, no.
It means to independently assess the condition and mileage. That's not difficult.
Hard. Externally, the camera may be good, and the mileage is normal, but, moreover, it swam, for example. Hidden defects cannot be seen. A camera that is too popular in the professional segment is really difficult to buy.
find service software, view the error log. well, and a flashlight to look everywhere.
I bought in Lviv with an overlay. When I can't even put a lens on my carcass and try - it works or not. Well, I'm not going to Kiev for the sake of shopping. And in the end, yes, I got on a camera with a story, but I'm not critical, that's enough for a couple of years, then I'll take a full-frame mirrorless camera if we survive 2020.
The fact that the camera was floating can be understood in principle and without looking inside, it is problematic to clean everything thoroughly. And the service (if it was cleaned well) is unlikely to figure it out right away, even if it disassemble the camera entirely, which is unlikely, so the SC is not a panacea, there is always a share of risk when buying a used one. But - who does not risk - he does not use inexpensive high-quality carcasses with glass, of which there are a lot on the secondary house :)
At one time, it was from such considerations that I made a choice in favor of the first penny, having bought it from a local amateur photographer with a meager mileage. I was already personally acquainted with the second mark at that time - I was insuring at the university at an event for one friend who handed me just mark 2 from 70-200.
But that was at a time when the grass in the pictures was greener and mark 2 on the secondary housing in decent condition cost 50k or more. Even then, it was nowhere easier to stumble upon a frankly driven device. And now it’s somehow dumb to think.
Well, Aurora Borealis won't make it to the first place. BGG.
What is there!)
"Made a choice in favor of the first dime, having bought it from a local amateur photographer with scanty mileage."
So it seems that the mileage of the first Pyatak cannot be found out :)
*
A lot of equipment in good condition on ebay from the Japanese.
mileage 5d classic in the service you can find out
Yo, where did you get this "classic" ?!
What, there were also “non-classic”, “modern”, “post-modern” ?!
I don’t understand the source.
There is Canon 5d, without any classics, ones, etc.
So no, even from seemingly sane people you hear it.
Western reviewers call it the 5D classic. To distinguish it from other brands and not call mark I.
I found in my city one person with this torturer, who showed me all the boxes, receipts and all 23-odd pictures taken on him with sequential file numbering. I myself did not think that this happens.
In ss, I was later confirmed the number.
Since the first penny has nothing but the function “to look at the picture taken on a dull screen”, their mileage is directly proportional to the muddiness of the shutter button. Moreover, this iron is slow, no one removes it in series anyway, because you can fall asleep.
I bought a mark 2 from hands the other day in Rostov. The budget was up to 30 thousand rubles. Was in Rostov passing by fleetingly, in the DPR such lots appear on the secondary housing once a month, or even a quarter.
Sobsno, instead of the declared 80k - 332k mileage (found out after installing the magic lantern). Well, for a hike this is a camera from the first batch, I did not immediately like that the screen is blue. Thank God this is exactly the jamb of the screen, not the matrix. Matrix without dead pixels by the way (most likely all remapping, huh?).
It can be seen on a CAREFULLY examination that I understood. But visually it looks very good, 4+.
I came here through the request “mark 2 colors like on film”, as this old-fashioned film type of photos frightened me at first. I'm already used to the refined contrast image on my shitty 1200d: D. Now I realized that this is “not a bug, but a feature”. Well, many people make film from refined photos in post-processing, I will do the opposite)
Thank you all for the review and comments, I figured out a few things for myself.
it remains to check the shutter. wrote many times how. in short, using continuous shooting at 1 \ 8000, series for 5-7 seconds, shoot something evenly white and with manual focus. in no frame should there be any trace of darkening at the top or bottom of the frame.
Wow ... a fossil of a bygone era)
“... a penny, a bottom, a piece of shit, killed, bombiles, whistles ...” - not enough slang, something how to understand what real professional photographers write ... and not some kind of amateur?
There are no “like” buttons, so I will like with words. By the way, to whom this "piece of shit" is unpleasant - give it to me: D
You do not understand, usually something is scolded by those who want, but cannot afford it. Therefore, they cannot give what they do not have.
Even students working on weekends in the “free cash register” poppy can even earn a second penny today, so we can assume that only schoolchildren scold the second nickel, or those who compared it to something else, yes.
Not necessary.
It can be just disappointed people, when their expectations and reality did not coincide with each other.
I am so disappointed in Nikon d750.
I had no overwhelming views. I needed a budget full frame camera on which I could use my fleet of lenses (partially full frame), batteries, memory cards and flash units. For example, the same 8-15 to work as a circular fish, and not just a diagonal one. 5D is too old. 5D3 or 6D2 - very good, but too expensive (especially two years ago) as for entertainment - there are more pressing needs. 5D2 met all these criteria and, despite some nuances, proved to be quite good. I don't expect flair, smell, taste, etc. from the technique. - for 10 years everything has already disappeared and decided.
Well, everyone has their own.
I wanted the d750 to work reliably, reliably and generally work well with the existing set of optics. The D750 let me down and I sold it. What I already wrote about. I will not be here, for offtop. For myself, I decided that I would avoid budget decisions, because you can expect a catch from them.
In my phrase, the key word is "usually". I am not suggesting that this is always the case.
So I do not say.
Victor, I didn't answer you, but Pokemon. And by the way, there are many "disappointed" among those who buy used equipment with all the ensuing problems. As far as I remember, Pokemon D750 also took it from his hands.
There was a completely boxed set - for which they made a distribution (the lens was sold separately, the camera separately) and the mileage was completely ridiculous - something about 10 thousand frames or less (I don't remember).
Used equipment must be watched live and checked with eyes, BUT it is impossible to foresee everything. In fact, I could have gotten so bad if I bought it new.
Despite the fact that the camera was released in 2016-2017 (I don't remember exactly now), it fell under one of the actions to replace the shutter. Oddly enough, on the Nikon website, according to my serial number, there were no recommendations for contacting the service and then by mail, after registering on the Nikon website, no
recommendations for replacing the valve block.
Later, after the sale, when I began to find out, I realized that with this camera this is almost a normal phenomenon, although I thought only the games of 2014-2015 were crooked.
This is the camera itself constructively, from birth such, and not someone shook it.
I had D90, D700 (bought second-hand), D3s (bought second-hand), D750 (bought second-hand).
Now from Nikonov left for the time being D4, which was also used.
In addition, there are Fuji S3Pro and S5Pro, which are not new either.
In addition, there are Canon 1Ds_Mk2 and 1Ds_mk3, which were bought second-hand.
Now one more 1Ds_mk2 with minimum mileage is going.
Of the film was this year Canon EOS50E, EOS5 - used, but both excellent cameras in excellent working order. Now from the used EOS3 film on hand - it is also very happy and also used.
Of the purchased new ones, there is a Sigma SD-1 Merrill, also happy.
Fuji X100T sold it, a friend sent it to me from Japan, who shot about 6 thousand frames on it. Also a great camera.
That's what I mean. If a thing is designed and made through the * opa, then even if it is used in a new one, it will still take the brain out, and fail at the most unnecessary moment.
And yes, well, it's a shame to allow such jambs when designing cameras.
Well, it would be amateur d3300, d5500. But FF cannot do that.
The funny thing is that there are no problems with the d3300.
But for d80, d90, d700, d600, d750 - it's a shame, yes.
Victor, what was wrong with D80, D90, D700?
D80, unfortunately, was not of its own, but there was an opportunity to borrow.
It seems that all these 3 cameras are reliable enough.
At d80 there is the same gear (but, as in d90, it walks as you are lucky), at d700 there is a mirror lifting mechanism, which often takes off before the shutter.
Ask Arkady, he also mentioned this in the review of the seven hundred.
All as lucky. Can run a million, can die in the region of 100-150.000. I don’t wrap myself up with this, the camera must undergo maintenance, this is the norm, I don’t care about all these little things about the resource, failure, the number of shutter releases, etc. I constantly read horror stories about problems here and on other sites, often the shortcomings of some cameras are presented as advantages of the opposing system. If the camera is new, this should not worry at all, since the guarantee covers everything. If used. - it is always a lottery. Everything breaks down sooner or later, especially if you shoot a lot.
In principle, yes, if you are filming commerce, the camera in any case fulfills itself, including all sorts of repairs (although I suppose there are such owners who act like a car - they buy a new one, use it "in the tail and in the mane" and at the end of the warranty sells), but if a person is an amateur and took a used camera in order to take pictures of cats / flowers / relatives, it is logical that he would like to deal with as few repairs as possible, even if he realizes that they are inevitable.
Yes, I also did not understand about three cameras. As for the D90, I can assume that we are talking about the notorious gear, although there are no problems with my D90. And about the D750, Arkady praised her in his review. At this point, how lucky is anyone.
Oh, yes, I forgot about the D600. There is also a well-known jamb with grease falling on the matrix. Then they quickly released the 610 to replace her.
Ivan, I communicated with the owners of the d610, they also had complaints about this camera for its reliability.
On the D750, you can read foreign forums and there were enough dissatisfied people.
Arkady praised in the review, but as the cameras themselves that he would recommend, he mentioned d810, d850.
On the d750, I had complaints about: 1) A falling off rubber eyecup (this is the first time I see this), 2) a “lazy” screwdriver, 3) incorrect operation of the AutoBB, 4) especially under the light of fluorescent lamps of different temperatures and colors. Inaccurate operation of the exposure meter. 5) The rear display is lying colors - you can customize, but you have to spend time on it. 6) Error d750 Err 7) Incompatibility with one of my favorite Sigma lenses.
Judging by most of the reviews that I come across, people tend to leave only negative reviews :) Or I'm not very picky.
This is exactly what happens. Do you take a positive experience for granted and why write about it? Negative - everything is exactly the opposite :-)
The review is good. IMHO the camera is very colorful, the picture is painted, but painted beautifully. Advertising on the site is annoying: some advertising frames change not only the picture, but also its size, as a result, the text begins to jump and bounce, which is annoying.
I often read about problems with advertising on this site. I don’t have any advertising at all, what am I doing wrong? ))
the other day we fixed the problem of the script, which the antivirus swears at
@Alexei
I have deliberately disabled ad blockers for Radozhiva (and some other sites): views / display of ads (obviously) allow Arkady to beat off hosting to some extent - and that's good.
But the fact that some frames (from optAd360) make the text jump - and Sergey mentioned this - it really annoys the boy. But ... in general, the gaze adapts. An inconvenience, of course, but not that it is quite discouraging to "go to the fire"
I'm choking on everything that can be suppressed on all sites, all banners, all ads, all just incomprehensible links, almost all Google, mail and Yandex servers with rambler are also blocked. I have been doing this since the days when I used a dial up modem on 33600. I make the list of servers for blocking myself, by hand. I have already accumulated several thousand :) in the end I have a fast and relatively clean Internet.
All tomatoes are different in taste and color ...)))
The photos were impressed. Especially a man without a jacket - a wonderful compositional solution!
Arkady is right - the author has his own, special style.
The review, unfortunately, is not very ...
Good afternoon!
I read the camera review, I was not impressed.
Too large in content, somehow dry, no personal live impressions of the camera.
But a good camera is a man's friend.
It seems to me that in order to review photographic equipment, it is necessary to study the reviews of Arkady, and according to his matrix, according to his sequence in conveying the characteristics of cameras, their advantages and disadvantages, introduce elements of love for technology, in short, there is no "goodness" in the description of this camera.
This review may have been suffered by the author, but not
encourages the reader to buy this used equipment.
Learn from Arkady, in principle it is not difficult, although you will have to strain all your convolutions.
the second brand does not need any reviews or advertising. everyone who understands at least something in the photo knows all its advantages and disadvantages very well. for over the years of using it, everyone has already written everything.
just take it and take it off. long years. and rejoice.
I remember the review of some one from the comments. It was so lively and personal that after reading it, all that was left was to shower and smoke on the balcony. And the photographer's profile contained about forty pictures of the camera itself + three poor pictures from it, accompanied by comments about the equipment so detailed that only the natal chart of each picture was missing.
I'm not used to singing odes to technique, it's just an instrument. Sometimes ahead of its time, or familiar, reliable and convenient. The goal is still photography itself.
Is that “collect moments, not things”?
After “I will publish pictures taken with this camera on my Instagram”, I honestly follow the link, checking if anything has appeared, and every time I make sure that there were no pictures from one, and there are not. But there is hope.
Yeah. I don’t even know what I’ll wait before - new pictures of Gagarin or Asians, taken from three meters.
Good afternoon!
Does it make sense to buy 85 mm 1.2 L-ku in pursuit of a more detailed and clear picture? which is already three times more than the carcass itself? After all, the camera is no longer young, and the lenses are being sharpened for new technology. Does it make sense to overpay. Or is it enough to buy a regular 1.8 and not take a steam bath? I am not a commissant, I am not typing.
Children's portraits for the soul.
But, in principle, on an open one will run into a shoot, so that the ears are blurry))
I can only warn you that this lens has been removed from support. its repair is difficult \ impossible, because there is no supply of spare parts. failure of USM hello to complete inoperability, since there is no mechanical manual focus there.
and so - beautiful glass. without any complaints.
Thank you!
In my case, in fact, everything is already ancient, but you can bite with your hands there.
We can say that he was the first serious portrait painter.