Attention: These forums are no longer active. The iStock Contributor forums have moved to the Contributor Community site.

Canon Question: 5Dii vs 5Diii vs 6D

First pagePrevious pageof 2
Displaying 21 to 36 of 36 matches.
wdstock
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloads
Posted Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:06PM
Agreed, that's a decision only you can make.
kparis
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:58AM
i have both the mk2 and the mk3 - i dont see the difference in cost being worth it personally. Its only when i'm shooting weddings that i really appreciate the better AF/ dual card slots/ silent shutter/ etc... in most other situations the mk2 is just as capable.

between the mk2 and 6D i'd probably opt for the 6D - wifi is great when you are doing studio work/ advertising since you can beam photos via wifi to an tablet, also the sensor is a new one and with only 20mpix on a FF sensor i'd expect noise handling to be pretty good.
RobMattingley
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:30AM
Yes, I'm definitely intrigued by the 6D.  It will fall just short of XXXL here but it seems to have a bunch of features that will make up for it.  Also, it gives me a little extra time to save up for it as I don't believe it comes out until December, correct?  Hmmm - what to do, what to do?

Thanks to everyone offering their two cents - greatly appreciated!  If anyone else stumbles onto this thread and wants to share their opinon, please do!
shaun
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:11AM
XXL is more than enough
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:50AM
^ StatsPlus (Tools / Applications forum) is an excellent way to check how many images you sell at each size. For me, by far the majority are in the XS --> L size bracket. Of course, the fewer downloads at larger sizes do bring in more cash per sale.
wdstock
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloads
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:59AM
Seems prices are coming down on the 5D2/3.
RobMattingley
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:13AM
Posted By wdstock:
Seems prices are coming down on the 5D2/3.

Oooh, very nice!  Now hopefully Henry's (the Canadian version of B&H) follows suit!

By the way, I am currently planning on adding the 24-105mm lens with my purchase (seems like a no-brainer to me to get a $1500 lens for $800) - that's a good idea, right?  I really don't have any good lenses at this point and figured it would be a good lens to have.
slobo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:30AM
yes, 24-105 is extremely useful lens. I find myself shooting with it most of a time. Also get a nice 50mm lens. I have 50/1.4 which is great but I hear that 50/1.8 is excellent as well (and much cheaper).
kelvinjay
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerForum Moderator
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:10PM
I love the 24-105. It's almost the perfect walk around lens for me. Of course, I'd love it more if it was f/2.8 - but the stabilization more than makes up for it for what I shoot.
RobMattingley
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:25PM
Posted By kelvinjay:
I love the 24-105. It's almost the perfect walk around lens for me. Of course, I'd love it more if it was f/2.8 - but the stabilization more than makes up for it for what I shoot.

Yes, I seem to recall reading you saying this in another thread in the past - you've convinced me!  Thanks Kelvin!

And slobo - I have the 50/1.8 and it is currently my go-to lens.  Thanks for your input, I appreciate it!!
Willowpix
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:03PM

Having moved from a(n even older) Rebel to the 5DII, I agree completely with HeliRy's thoughts up above, Rob. It was/is so much better (for my purposes) in all ways. And the only reason (other than a little cash ) I'm moseying on getting the 5DIII right now is the 5DII is still great for what I'm currently doing. But I don't currently have any small children/granchildren that 61 focus points rather than 9 would unquestionably do a better job of chasing around to document their frantic lives. All to say there is nothing wrong with the II IMO, except - parroting several posts above - the III has the stronger AF.


Yes, I'd definitely get that "L" kit lens with the body. I did exactly that (for the same one third-ish less price reason) as you are contemplating. And I have no regrets - love that lens.
KolaczanCLOSED
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:56PM
X2 on this. I'm not sure why you think that you can't afford the 1 series. Even a 1D4 is priced well below what you would pay for a 5DIII. I know that it isn't "quite" full frame so if you are the type who can only see the "magic" in full frame and nothing else then never mind. But it is certainly no slouch of a camera.


Posted By igermz:



Posted By simonbradfield: "...used 5DII from a reputable camera store"




Used 1DSMKII & used 5DMKII both running ~1500USD here & now, I think. Good value. Seems worth considering the new 24-70 if you really need a "zoom" to pair w/ the used body. The 85 f/1.8 w/ current discount (even without) is a best buy for IQ/$.



(Edited on 2012-10-24 14:56:58 by Kolaczan)

(Edited on 2012-10-24 14:57:22 by Kolaczan)
RobMattingley
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:43PM
Posted By Kolaczan:
I'm not sure why you think that you can't afford the 1 series.

At this point I'm looking to buy new - and the only 1 series camera that I can find new is the 1DX and that runs close to $7k.

Thanks for your input Ted!  I definitely like the price of the 5D2 and if it drops just a bit more, I'll probably jump on it!
Zeiss4Me
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:44PM
I own a 5D Mark 2 and recently purchased a 5D Mark 3. The image quality of both is very good and most people feel there isn't much difference in the image quality. However there are a number of features on the 5D Mark 3 that I really like. The improved autofocus typically gets the most attention but other features are upgraded too. The silent mode is really nice if you take pictures in churches, candids etc. I like the option of displaying a grid in the viewfinder which I find helps my composition. The maximum frame rate is noticeably faster (6 FPS I believe) which makes it a better camera for action. If you do a lot of candids and action photography I'd go with the 5D Mark 3. If you do mostly studio or landscape photography I'd save some money and get the Mark 2.
wdstock
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloads
Posted Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:52PM
RobMattingley
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:44AM
Posted By wdstock:
Getting even cheaper!

Why won't Canada follow suit?  Argh!  Hopefully soon they will!
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 2
Displaying 21 to 36 of 36 matches.
Not a member?Join