Image quality with the Canon 5Dmark 2 vs. the 5Dmark3?

[ryee3]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thinking about getting a Canon 5D Mark 2 vs the newer 5D Mark 3 to use with my R lenses. Can someone who has used both comment on the image quality? I am currently using the Canon 1D Mark 4 but need a 2nd body. Unfortunately, the Canon IQ is not as good as the Leica DMR but moving forward...

 

If the IQ is the same, then I am most interested in the 5D Mark 2 as a backup. I know the 5D Mark 3 is a bit faster fps but as a backup the Mark 2 may be more than adequate especially if the IQ is similar. I also like the ability to change the view finder in the Mark 2 and the lower cost. Thanks in advance for everyone's comments:).

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sc_rufctr]

The Mk3 is definitely better than the Mk2 but the difference is is marginal IMO. (I've used both but only owned the 5D Mk2)

Right now I'm using a EOS 1Ds Mkii and love the results I'm getting. It was so cheap I had to buy it. I also use the split focus screen and couldn't be happier.

 

Have you considered a used 1Ds?

[sfage]

What is it about the image quality that you don't like?

[ryee3]

The color saturation compared to the DMR files are not as rich and vibrant regardless of the ISO settings when using the same lenses, settings etc. I assume it has to do with the quality of the sensor.

 

A recent review stated there may not be that much differences between the MK 2 and 3 in terms of image quality. I was hoping someone had some personal experience to direct me which one to consider. Thanks again.

[farnz]

I have a 5D2 but haven't used a 5D3 so I can't help with a comparison. The 5D2's mirror fouls some R lenses but I don't know whether you would have the same problem with your 1D Mk4 so I thought I'd mention it in case you weren't aware.

 

Pete.

[HeinzX]

I had a 5 D II, a 1 D IV and now a 5 D III (sold the 1 D IV mainly because of weight - I am 65 in July) There is not much difference between quality of pictures between

5 D II an 5 D III, with exception of high ISOs ( I would say one stop). Sealing is much better than the 5 D II, AF too. In my opinion the AF is even better than that of the 1 D IV.

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I highly recommend you try Adobe DNG Profile Editor . I recently profiled an M with current 50 Summicron and an old but nearly perfect condition 50 Summicron Collapsible. The Old lens is softer at wide stops and very much lower in saturation, yet the editor evens out the colors to a remarkable degree. It does not fix softness.

 

The profile has to be set up by converting a Canon file to DNG with the free DNG converter. You do not need to convert Canon raws to DNG to make the profile work.

[zlatkob]

I've used both the 5D2 and 5D3 quite a lot, though not with Leica R lenses. For my work, the 5D3 is much better due to:

• a very substantial improvement in autofocus options and autofocus accuracy;
  
• much improved performance at high ISO, easily one stop more in range;
  
• shorter shutter lag & mirror blackout, so the camera feels more responsive overall;
  
• option to use two very quiet shutter modes, wonderful for quiet places;
  
• option to use a higher frame rate for action;
  
• dual cards for instant backup;
  
• superb Auto-ISO feature; and
  
• custom modes that remember your settings (C1, C2, C3).
  

Obviously, the autofocus improvement will have no impact on R lenses or other manual focus lenses. And the improved high ISO performance only matters if you shoot at high ISO, probably ISO 1600 and higher. At lower ISO settings, the differences in image quality are likely to be very minor.

 

There are some other improvements, such as the locking mode dial and the 100% viewfinder, but the ones above have been most useful for me.

 

If you only use manual focus, then the ability to change the focusing screen to the precision type may be an advantage for the 5D2. The 5D3 doesn't offer changeable screens.