Canon has announced the 5D Mark II, the successor to the groundbreaking 5D, which brought full-frame image-making to the masses three years ago.
The new camera boasts a 21.03 megapixel CMOS sensor which, according to Rob Galbraith, Canon promises will produce the highest image quality and lowest noise ever from an EOS digital SLR.
Bold claim? You bet.
Here´s a quick rundown of some of what look like some of the most interesting advancements in the new camera, particularly with an eye toward concert photography and other low-light applications.
21 MP CMOS sensor:
Fulfilling the flurry of rumors before the camera´s release, Canon has dropped in a massive 21 megapixel chip into the 5D Mark II based on the sensor of their flagship, the Canon 1Ds Mark III.
When combined with the statements that the new 5D will lead the EOS line in image quality and noise performance, the large-resolution specs are even more impressive.
With a native file size of 5616 x 3744 pixels, the resolution of the redesigned sensor is highly competitive, particularly against the full-frame competition of other manufacturers. Compared to the resolution of the D700, which renders 4256 x 2832 pixel files, the 5D Mark II a 30% increase in pixels.
ISO 100-6400, expandable to 50-25600:
Following the Nikon D3, Canon has matched Nikon´s latest full-frame cameras in the high ISO arena by specifying ISO ranges up to 6400. Just like the Nikon D3 and D700, the new Canon 5D Mark II is capable of extensions to ISO 12800 and 25600 as high modes.
For many executions of concert photography, clean high ISO performance is a prerequisite for the most capable tools, but one can only assume that noting ISO 6400 as in-spec is a sign of Canon’s confidence in the new sensor and processing.
While there´s no official mention of the much-rumored pixel binning at sRAW to achieve lower noise levels, it will be very interesting to see whether the new 5D Mark II lives up to the reputation of its predecessor as a high performance low-light machine.
920,000 dot rear LCD:
Personally, I think an accurate, high resolution LCD is a very valuable feature to utilize in the field, and it´s great to see that Canon has included a screen to match the Nikon D3 and D700.
For even tasks as simple as checking focus at 100% on the fly, the new crop of 920,000 dot screens.
Comparing the screen on the latest Canon 1-Series cameras to the Nikon D3 and D700, there’s no contest between the clarity and usability of the newer high dot pitch LCDs.
Canon users are going to love the quality of this LCD.
DIGIC 4 processor:
First introduced with the Canon 50D in the EOS line, the 5D Mark II sports the new DIGIC 4 processor, which is possible of processing 21 MP of data at 3.9 frames per second.
With the release of the Canon 50D and the new 5D Mark II not slated to ship until October and November, respectively, the verdict is out on the DIGIC 4´s ability to deliver with regard to image quality, particularly at high ISO. I´m particularly interested in the road Canon takes with noise reduction with this new chipset.
If the specs alone are any indication of the improvement, the 5D Mark II goes up to ISO 6400 in its normal range of sensitivity, compared to the ISO 1600 limit of the 1Ds Mark III and its two DIGIC 3 processors.
1080p HD video recording:
Love it or hate it, video is coming to DSLRs. First ushered in by the Nikon D90 several weeks ago, the 5D Mark II continues the trend, coming in with a robust 1080p over the D90´s 720p. I take the inclusion of this feature as a sign that DSLRs with movie modes will become standard issue from here on out.
Weather sealing, magnesium body:
With its plastic frame and lack of environmental seals often cited as points against the 5D, the Mark II addresses these concerns with a magnesium-alloy frame with weather sealing.
For photographing outdoor music festivals with unpredictable, wet, or dusty weather, environmental seals are always welcome, especially when paired weather-sealed lenses.
With the weather-sealing of the 1-Series cameras as persistent talking points, it’s nice to see a more compact option for the EOS system.
The only minor concessions are the use of plastic on the sides and bottom of the camera.
Other Notes:
The new Canon 5D looks like quite an interesting camera from the above advancements, but there are still some open questions as to the new camera´s performance.
Autofocus:
The 5D Mark II essentially makes minor updates to its predecessor´s AF capabilities, with 9 AF points, the center of which is cross-type. In addition, the camera sports six non-selectable AF assist points clustered around the center AF point.
On paper, this is a step back from the 50D´s 9-point AF system in which all sensors are cross-type, and much less than Nikon´s 51-point AF system with 15 cross-type sensors that has been rolled out in the D3, D300, D700.
Only field use will tell how the DIGIC 4 processor will perform for demanding AF situations.
High ISO performance:
Naturally, the comparison we would all like to see is how the 5D Mark II stacks up against the Nikon D3/D700 sensor. Will Canon be able to reclaim the high ISO mantle, or at least match the performance of the more modest Nikons?
With a pixel pitch of 6.4µm, it remains to be seen what Canon´s DIGIC 4 processing can muster up when it comes to the high ISO department. I think what should be most interesting is if, through intelligent pixel binning, Canon and produce a very clean 10mp sRAW file from the Mark II.
As early samples trickle in, general consensus is that the images look surprisingly good for a 21 megapixel sensor.
Speed:
With a shutter lag of 73ms, mirror blackout of 145ms, and a slower 3.9fps burst rate, is the 5D Mark II fast enough?
Compared to the Canon 1D Mark III, with 55 ms shutter lag, 80ms mirror blackout, the 5D Mark II is certainly a slower beast.
The D700 weighs in with 45ms shutter lag and 74ms mirror black out – nearly twice as fast – with a frame rate of 5fps standard, or up to 8fps with the vertical grip.
In addition, the new 5D Mark II features a slower flash sync speed of 1/200 in comparison to the more standard 1/250 of the D3, D700, and 1D Mark III.
End Notes:
While less innovative in some regards than its predecessor, the new 5D Mark II certainly looks like an interesting machine for many applications. In particular, studio and landscape photographers may well have a new champion camera, and at less than half the cost of the Canon 1Ds Mark III.
With Canon claiming a 2.5-stop improvement over the current 1Ds at high ISO, things get even more interesting.
As for the 1D Mark III, the new 5D is certainly no speed threat to that sports and PJ-oriented camera, but presents an interesting options for users of that camera nonetheless.
For concert photographers using Canon, the big question remains: Will this camera cut it in the demanding arena of the photo pit?
To this end, the biggest open questions remain speed and image quality, and more specifically, AF performance and high ISO performance.
You can view Canon´s official page for the 5D Mark II here:
For more info, I highly suggest checking out DPReview’s in-depth preview of the 5D MarkII.
Images courtesy of Canon USA.
22 Comments Add your own
1. Bryan Kremkau | September 17th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
How the hell do you afford all these cameras? lol
2. Todd | September 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Hey Bryan, these first impressions are simply offered based on the specifications, previews, and other info available at this time.
Believe me, with the D3 and D700, I´m not really in the market for another camera in the near future.
3. chris tuite | September 17th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
hey todd,
i agree that 3.9 fps is just way too slow for concert photography!
4. Todd | September 17th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Hey Chris, I´m a fan of high speed cameras, and the 3.9 fps is just a little sluggish for my needs. At the very least, more speed is always a nice option, even if it not used for all shooting.
Regardless, the 5Dmk2 still looks like a great camera for many applications.
5. Joel | September 17th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
I’ll definitely be picking one of these up when they hit the ground. My 20D is looking for a break and a full frame is something I’ve been eyeing off for some time.
I’m not so sure the 3.9fps is too slow for concert photography when you’ve come from a film background. Full frame will invariably be slower than crop sensors in this area. This is why a comparison with the EOS 1Ds MkIII is a better one - 5 fps or 3 fps max 56 JPEG, 12 RAW
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos1dsmkiii.asp
6. Todd | September 17th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
I come from a film background shooting manual focus cameras with a manual film advance, but I´m also a firm believer in progress. I wouldn´t hold current and future models to the same paradigm as old tech.
That said, the old Nikon F3H (High Speed) did 13.5 FPS.
Again, I´ll take all the speed I can get – it´s better to have it as an option than be limited by the tools we use.
7. Joel | September 17th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Don’t get me wrong todd, I’m a believer in such progress too. Full frame digital slrs have always had lower frame rates due to a combination of cache issues + sensor preparation. It would be interesting to understand from a technical point of view why it couldn’t be faster when using either:
* lower resolution;
* live preview;
* mirror lockup.
8. Todd | September 17th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
It´s true, one would think that the sRAW modes should tax the DIGIC processors less to a degree that would offer higher frame rates.
Assuming the Canon DIGIC and Nikon EXPEED processors are essentially equivalent, one would expect that the 10mp sRAW file should be able to at least grant a similar spec to the D700´s still-modest 5fps, if not better.
Still, it seems as though the D3´s 9fps is still the champ for full-frame speed.
9. Chris | September 17th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
I dunno, I guess I was expecting a little bit more from canon. Certainly faster frame rate. Talking with some Canon buds today, they are excited about it — but they seemed to think Canon was panicking a bit, and certainly could have done better. In fact, one of the fella’s I was talking to who shoots with a Canon 40D, 24-70, 70-200, and a variety of other equipment and lenses said he was at the point to where he would much rather take a D300 right now, but the cost of switching all the lenses just wouldn’t be worth it. I guess it has it’s pros — lots of megapixels for people who need to do uber big enlargments, but for some reason I was still expecting more. The high ISO will be great — it will be cool to see some examples of such shots. Not to mention the HD recording capability sounds pretty cool. I know I was against it at first [still kind of am], but now you can get FX-like bokeh on digital cameras that usually came from very high-end cameras used in hollywood - or so I would assume.
So, I guess the big thing to ask is — what does Chris think about it? Is it worth it to drop the 1Ds? I guess I don’t know much about that camera, but it would offer him higher ISO and full-frame-ness…
10. Todd | September 17th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Hey Chris, I think it will be interesting to see how the 5Dmk2 stacks up against the 1Dmk3, which of course is much more of a known quantity when it comes to image quality.
The full-frame platform is really something that I’ve enjoyed, and I’m sure there are going to be a whole crop of concert photogs that are going to love it.
Now it’s too bad Canon doesn’t have a 14-24mm f/2.8.
11. Harry Simpson | September 17th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Ya know I was really hoping for better AF and the HD is fine but I could do without that. Hmmm my 40D does 6.5 fps….
12. Todd | September 19th, 2008 at 10:49 am
The AF of the new 5D does seem to be one more disappointing specs at first glance. We’ll have to see how the DIGIC 4 processor handles AF calculations.
At least for the center AF point, I have no doubt that its acquisition and precision should be good. The more troubling issues are the spread of AF points and the lack of additional cross-type sensors. For focus-recompose using the center point, I don’t think performance will be an issue.
In light of the controversy of the 1D Mark III, we’ll have to see how Canon has handled the implementation of this AF system.
13. Olivier | September 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Hmm..
View Finder coverage on the 5DmkII is +/- 98% while the D3/D300 is 100%
Too bad that the D700 has only 95%
The camera doesn’t look that bad at all. But, even for sport photography it still too slow.
Anyway, I don’t think a big machine will help to take beter pictures ;-)
14. Todd | September 19th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Olivier, I think the point you bring up about the viewfinder is a good one. While 100% is preferable, I think a large and bright 98% viewfinder will be completely satisfactory for almost all users.
For PJ and other fast-moving types of shooting, the difference between 95%, 98%, and 100% is quite marginal. I don’t even think about VF coverage when switching between the D3 and D700 shooting concerts.
As for the overall speed of the 5D Mark II, I agree, it’s not going to be first pick for sports shooters. Compared cameras with more robust, high-speed specs, the new camera is lackluster in this regard.
15. Tasha | September 19th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
The lack of AF points is starting to bug me more and more.
*sigh*
Good review, Todd.
16. Todd | September 19th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Hey, Tasha! I just did a quick comparison between the D700’s Af spread and that of the 5Dmk2.
Basically the Nikon has a slightly wider spread in both horizontally and vertically. Going from the D700’s Af spread as a reference, it is one row taller and two columns wider than that of the 5D Mark II.
All this said, the overall difference in the extremes doesn’t look like a deal breaker. As you mention, the number of points themselves (and cross-type sensors, too), are another matter.
17. ww | September 23rd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
I am disappointed. I would rather have a robust, weather-sealed, compact body with an array of, lets say 32 AF points, 16.5 mp, 5-8 fps, high ISO performance, and can do without live-view, HD movie, and that damn dedicated print button. 21 mp, high ISO sensitivity, and video won’t matter if there isn’t a reliable AF system. So what I’m describing is basically a smaller version of the 1DsII with a 5D sensor, higher ISO, a bigger LCD, and a new processor. That’s not so much to ask isn’t it?
18. Todd | September 23rd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Hey ww, thanks very much for your thoughts. I think the camera you describe sounds great to me, and is the body that many PJ shooters were hoping for with the Mark II.
I think we’ll have to wait for the 1D Mark III replacement for such a camera, though of course with that line there’s no guarantee it would be full-frame.
19. Erin Suggett | September 26th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Hi Todd,
I prefer Canon for my sporting dog photography and Nikon for my concert photography. However, I don’t own either one yet. I usually borrow one or the other from my friends. Cameras are kind of expensive nowadays. I shoot primarily with my Konica Minolta {yes, it still works} due to sentimental reasons. What can I say, I’m a mush when it comes to my old timer cameras that still deliver the shot. I still from time to time shoot with my old film cameras, but not that often. I’m torn with whether or not to purchase a Canon or a Nikon next as my new machine. I usually shoot dog sporting more than I do concerts, but watch…if I purchase a Canon, I’ll start shooting more concerts! LOL! What is your take on the Mamiya medium formats for concerts? Not that I want one, but if anyone has a spare laying around…I’ll be glad take it! ;)
Thanks for one of the best photography sites on the web!
Erin Suggett
Rock-n-Dog Photog
20. Todd | September 26th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Hi Erin,
My first question is, why do you prefer Canon for dog sporting and Nikon for concerts? Second, what bodies have you used, and (related to question one) what about them works for you?
I don’t think a medium format camera would be my choice in the pit simply due to the ISO range (the 645ZD only goes to ISO 400), but with the right lighting and a need for that resolution, it could be an interesting option. For film, the Mamiya 7 would be cool for very specific shooting, but again, not necessarily my first choice. I think gear choice all comes down to needs, intended use/output, and your vision.
Hope this helps.
21. Jeff | September 26th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Has anyone considered that the 5D II actually shoots 30 fps at 1,920 x 1080? These frame grabs from 1080p video could be useful. See some impressive examples at Vincent Laforet’s page. One more thing to consider. The 5D II can also take a full frame still at any time you choose while the video is recording (causes a slight pause in the video). Think about this. You can be recording 30 fps “HD quality” frames and then get the HQ stills whenever you want. Could help you capture that one in a million shot! Better get that 32 GB CF card!
Also, as far as the focusing goes. I depend on very accurate center focusing, reframe the picture THEN shoot. I don’t have very good luck with the camera trying to guess what I want to focus on. My usable pictures greatly increased after using this technique. Therefore all these focusing points don’t really matter unless I can manually switch them quickly at will with a joystick or my eye (some older EOS cameras had real time eye selection of focus points! Love to see that again).
Just my thoughts. First post from a longtime lurker. Todd, your an inspiration to me.
22. Todd | September 26th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Hi Jeff, thanks for your thoughts on this new camera, and nice to have you participating in the discussion.
I think the paradox of video as a 30fps alternative is that the situations where the constraints of video are most workable are arguably not the moments that benefit from a very high frame rate.
I use both focus-recompose and individual AF points, depending on the needs of the subject/image.
The focus-recompose method is always going to be slower than using an individual AF point and tracking due to the delay built into the technique.
With the AF of the Canon 1-Series and the 51-point system in the D3/D700/D300, the AF points are individually selectable.
speak up
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>