Calling all Canon users...

[SoundmanJohn]

I'm seriously thinking of moving to a second-hand Canon 5D (Mk 1) mainly because of the wide choice of lenses. Anyone care to comment on that particular model? I really want to go for a full-frame sensor, and need something that copes with low light levels.

Thanks in advance,

John

[James Wheeler]

I haven't used one but have heard great things about them. I don't know what their high iso handling is like though. Darren might be able to give some more info.

Is there any particular reason you want to go full frame? (just out of interest).

[James Wheeler]

A few reviews I have found, most have ISO samples:


http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5d.htm

http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/canon_5D/Canon_5D_review.html

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/ (use the drop down box at the top to quick jump to samples etc)

[SoundmanJohn]

Hi James,

The main part of my photographic endeavours takes place in theatres, where noise at high ISO settings is a factor. I'm told by a number of pro photographers that full frame sensors handle low light conditions better than their smaller counterparts. However, the first of the reviews that you've found seems to suggest that the 5D doesn't handle moving subjects very well, so perhaps I'd better think again. My other choice would be the Nikon D700, but it's newer than the 5D and prices are considerably higher on the second hand market.May be there isn't a camera which is good for both fast-moving subjects in bright(ish) conditions and slow moving ones in the dark!

Thanks for the pointers to the reviews - I will peruse them carefully. However, as my studio computer has just packed up, I may have to wait a while. I suppose it's getting on for ten years old and has had a hard life, so I mustn't be too upset. And of course there's the tax-man to be paid...

Regards,

John

[James Wheeler]

Whats available depends on your budget I suppose.

You might pick up a good bargain on a secondhand 1dmkIII now the MkIV is out. It isn't quite full frame sensor but it is bigger than the 1.6 crop (I think its an APS-H sensor, the smaller are APS-C).

What do you do with the photos from the theatre? Print them? Are they used in small pamphlets or only on screen?

[SoundmanJohn]

It all depends: sometimes they just go in an archive, sometimes they get handed out to cast members, sometimes they form the basis of print and online publicity material, although this is only when the production photographer has done a really bad job, or missed something that I managed to catch, which does sometimes happen. I'm beginning to think that the two scenarios might be mutually exclusive, as I now seem to have the worst of both worlds with the Nikon D80, although it does seem fine for static subjects in good light.

I'll see if I can do more research - thanks for the ongoing information.

Best wishes,

John

[Graeme]

Hi John,
you may not remember me; you sent me some cokin filters, and making good use of them. Thank you! 
 I currently have a Nikon D90. its been bullet proof for a year so far. It doesn't have a full frame sensor, but low light images have been impressive. The other camera I could suggest is the new Nikon D3S. I'm looking at it longingly at the moment. There is a large review of it in the February Practical Photography. Its pricey at £4000, body only. But it can cope with ISO 12,800. Sometimes only the best will do 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    I also read an article by a certain Darren Harbar in the same mag,  on how to clean a camera. Very helpfull.
Regards,
Graeme.

[Graeme]

Oops! The afore mentioned chap also wrote the D3S review. 10 out of 10 for observation to me Maybe he might have some pointers for you?

[MattHunt]

Hi John,

For its time the 5D was very good at high ISO, but now it does look as good. If you look on my flickr site (link ought to below I think) there are pictures taken on a D700 last weekend. The exif data is also available from flickr, but they are generally taken at ISO 1200 and above.

However, if you're a Canon user the extra cost of lens changes is probably a bad thing...the 7D seems to be good though.

Matt

[Darren Harbar]

Hi guys,

i am sorry that I have only just picked up on this thread. 

Glad to hear the cleaning review and the D3s test were of interest.

Noise levels on new DSLRs are so much better than they were just a year ago. Nikon is leading the field with the brands approach to use a lower resolution sensor to reduce noise. This makes the current Nikon full frame cameras perfect for low light work, but you do lack the resolution detail. To be honest, the resolution is not a problem, even for large printing so the D3/D3s and D700 are excellent choices. Canon has made significant advances in the brands own noise reduction, but it still isn't on a par with Nikon. The 5D MkII was the first improvement, and the latest 1D MkIV is the current Canon champion (The 7D is not so good on noise, because it's an APS-C sensor with 18-million pixels packed in).

To answer the original question, the original 5D is a superb camera. It's not suited to low-light and it lacks the bigger buffer and speed of the MkII, but it's a great camera for detail. Focussing is slow, but it's not designed to be used for action photography. If it's a choice between the 5D or the D700, and you are not tied to a lens system already - for low light,  go for the Nikon.

Hope that helps?

Darren

[MattHunt]

Phew! I can tell Mrs H that the D700 was a worthy purchase now

[SoundmanJohn]

Darren,

Thanks for all that info - very interesting. I'll start gathering pennies once I've sorted out the replacement computer and see what stage I get to.

Off to the USA for ten days - mostly work - sigh...

Regards,

John