Canon EOS 5D reviewed

If you're ready to upgrade from the Digital Rebel to a full-frame, pro-quality digicam, the 12.8 megapixel Canon EOS 5D may just be the right way to go. DigitalCameraInfo tried out the $3,300 camera, and found its "blend of prosumer design and professional performance" to be "unrivaled." Some highlights include the full-frame sensor, which does away with the conversion factor from 35mm common on other DSLRs, the ability to fine-tune ISO settings, and shutter speed that goes all the way to 1/8000. Of course, there are some downsides, including the relatively low-powered LCD, having to dig through menus for functions that should be more readily accessible on buttons, and the lack of a popup flash. However, the review still concludes that the 5D is "truly without competition."

[Geqxon @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

My mom is soooo gonna buy this for me.

[jesse @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

one sign of a professional camera body is a lack of built-in flash.

[Samuel @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

Yes, but the real reason is that full-size sensors (or at least larger-sized) makes the mirror larger, which makes it harder to fit in a built-in flash.

[joe @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

oh....I wish I could upgrade my 10d to this bad boy....sigh...

[Jeff @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

"one sign of a professional camera body is a lack of built-in flash."

Except that this is not a professional body, nor is it intended to be.

Pop Photo probably said it best in this month's issue; this is an updated 1Ds with the body of a 20D. It's for people who want a full frame sensor but don't need (and don't want to pay for) a pro-quality or pro-sized body.

I'm sure it will be wildly successful for that reason. But it's supposedly built out of the same plastic as the 20D and has a lot of the same controls. It's just missing the pop-up flash. I think this is actually pretty unfortunate given that market segment, but it's probably not a deal-breaker. (Pop-up flash is often pretty useful as fill flash during backlit situations, for example.)

I doubt they'd have left the flash out unless they had to. The body would probably have to be a bit bigger to fit it in there, which would negate one of the aspects of this camera that makes it desirable (it's obviously the smallest full-frame digital SLR out there).

[PhilJ @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

I ordered the 5D, upgrading from a Digital Rebel, and there is simply no contest (full frame, speed, no more plastic, etc), the 5D is a great camera, and I do agree with the caveats (menu, LCD, etc), but I'll never get rid of it.

For me, built-in flashes are barely usable. I've taken some horrid shots with the built-in on the Drebel, and they stink. Granted, more a comment on my ability than the flash itself, but I never used it, even in excessive backlight (use FEL/FEC, then fix in the darkroom, easier to fix than crappy flash).

It's a significant investment for a hobbyist, but one that I don't think a hobbyist would regret. Pros need to look into the newer MarkII anyway.

[mpeng @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

Dang it! I just ordered myself a 20D! Like I could afford the 5D.

[x @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

I own a 5d and the body is NOT plastic like the 20d but it is magnesium composite.

[Nivedita @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

What?
12.3Megapixel.
That's amazing.Who says, buy camera fitted mobile instead of only camera? I shall say,buy digicam.
What about other colours in body?


Visit me at:
http://www.mindzone.co.nr

[Rory Bigger @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I couldn't find any mention in the review of what glass was used, which gives all of the image quality results about zero credibility.

[Nick @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

>>I couldn't find any mention in the review of what glass was used, which gives all of the image quality results about zero credibility.<<

24-70mm f/2.8L

It's on page 2 of the review.

[Doc. @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/carpeicthus/50301841/

This photographer has an excellent little post on why the 5D is NOT as nessesary as it seems. Yes, when I saw it I too wanted it and it's full 12.3 MP glory, but unless you're a stock photographer or work with magazines or ads, 12.3 MP is total overkill.

I guess if you have a full set of Canon lenses and want to sink $3,000 on another digicam, go for it, I'd love to make the money you make. And as far as glass goes, you better have some damn fine lenses, because 12.3 MP is gonna kick the ass out of your cheapo glass.

Then again, if you're a pro who wants something smaller than one of the professional bodies, shoot, go for it. I just see the $3000 price tag (not including another couple thousand for some really nice glass) as a little daunting for someone who isn't doing stock, wedding, or ad copy work.

But then again, maybe I'm just jealous.

[daevh @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

My 20D happens to be magnesium (like any other out there!). No in-built flash? Well they aren't great for a start (buy a Speedlite!) but they're not found on full frame cameras because of the larger size of the [roof] pentaprism over APS-C sized pentaprisims (or pentamirrors in the case of the 300D/350D).

Dear me, get your facts right before posting people...

[Whitney @ Dec 19th 2005 1:37AM]

One thing to think about though, is that having a full frame sensor means you will probably want better quality lenses. Vignetting is more prevalent on full frame than APS-C sized sensors.