Only 3fps on 5D?!

andy_fozzy

andy_fozzy

SPAM Merchant
Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,450
Name
Andy!
Edit My Images
Yes
I was considering trading my 1D MKII for a 5D, as I've always wanted one,
but having discovered the 5D is only 3fps, I'm not going to now!

How disappointing.

Why is it so poor?
 
'Cause it was aimed at portrait & landscape togs, not paparazzi.
 
horses for courses pal, 5d mk 11 is super high res aimed at landscapes and portraits, not sport or wildlife.
 
depends on your subject matter as to whether you need more really..

ive got a 1Dmk3, do i use its maximum fps even shooting sports? no.. but its nice to have the option i guess?! lol
 
Fozzy, you will never be happy in whatever you hold in your possession, I think the time has come for you to go back to Sony again. :p
 
I had a 1D before my 5D. That could do single, 3fps or 8.5fps. I seem to remember only ever using 8.5fps when I was trying to impress someone. In reality, for what I normally shoot 3fps is quite enough.
 
5D Mark II is 3.9fps. It's a lot faster than you think.
 
Cheers for the replies.

I am aware that it's a landscape and portrait camera.
3fps is still a bit on the slow side though!
But yes, point taken.

I am very keen on HDR, and that's what I enjoy doing most.
And landscape stuff, so the 5D would suit me down to the ground.
BUT, my 1D and it's amazing 8.5fps means I can most of the time do away with the need for a tripod when I want to take 3 bracketed shots.
Many of my recent HDR stuff have been taken hand-held.
I'd miss this if I didn't have the 1D......
 
Don't do it Andy. You'll regret it. The Mk II is a better camera all round. Have a play with my 5D next time we're out.
 
Dave Stone said:
Don't do it Andy. You'll regret it. The Mk II is a better camera all round. Have a play with my 5D next time we're out.
Click to expand...

I think you are right mate.

I (as you know) adore my 1D, and would miss it terribly.

When I start selling my images for megabucks, I can have both :D
 
The 5D has superior IQ to the 1DII or IIn, but they are faster. Nikon give you more FPs, especially when using a grip but Canon seem intent to cripple us into buying a fast cam and a slow cam. The 5D II is 3.9 fps because the 1DsIII is 5fps, the 7D is 8.5 fps because the 1DIIIa nd IV are 10fps...

I have to say the 5D could have at least 5fps, then one could buy 1 camera to do all....but they dnt want that do they ;) Besides, the 5D and mkII have c**p AF so more than 3.9 fps would be of no use ;) because the body would not keep up.
 
The reason is nothing to do with it being aimed at landscape and portrait togs it is canon deliberately creating arbitrary differeneces bettween cameras to force the market into the form it wants, there is absolutely no technical reason why the 5dmkii couldn't have a much high frame rate and a better focussing system canon just choose not to put it in so hopefully people will by a 7d to compliment there 5d instead of just one camera. It's the same as there on going refusal to put a job wheel on the xxxd series cameras.
 
Its partly processing power, the high data throughput of the faster cameras often calls for twin processors, and the 1D3, 1D4 and 7D has twin processors, whereas the 5D and 5D2 has single processors.

Also they can't make a lesser camera out perform their top of the range offering - just by offering 'affordable' full frame, the 5D was a market changing camera at the time.
 
3.9fps is plenty for most situations... I shot fast moving aircraft with the 7D and ended up with four blank frames as it went over so even that's theoretically not fast enough! ;)

As for the 5DMKII's AF not being up to scratch, I can't say I agree with that. Granted, it doesn't work in near darkness but I've not had any problems with it in low light or low contrast shots either.

Si
 
If you're used to a 1 series body but want full frame you could get a 1Ds?
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
I had a 1D before my 5D. That could do single, 3fps or 8.5fps. I seem to remember only ever using 8.5fps when I was trying to impress someone. In reality, for what I normally shoot 3fps is quite enough.
Click to expand...

I agree with this...mostly. I did use the higher burst rate for gigs though.
 
Spiritflier said:
As for the 5DMKII's AF not being up to scratch, I can't say I agree with that. Granted, it doesn't work in near darkness but I've not had any problems with it in low light or low contrast shots either.
Click to expand...

I think the main complaint about the AF isn't that it's rubish it just could have been so much more, canon clearly have the technology available but chose no to use it on this camera forcing artificial segmentation of the market to maximise profits.
 
trencheel303 said:
If you're used to a 1 series body but want full frame you could get a 1Ds?
Click to expand...

The 1Ds has better AF than the 5D, but is just as slow and is not as good at high ISOs.

I had a 1DmkII for a while but for some reason I was never fully happy with it, I but I am loving the 5DmkII. I know the AF is slow and clunky and that it's relatively slow, but once you start looking at the images it produces you soon forgive it these little issues.
 
a1ex2001 said:
I think the main complaint about the AF isn't that it's rubish it just could have been so much more, canon clearly have the technology available but chose no to use it on this camera forcing artificial segmentation of the market to maximise profits.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
When I first bought my 5D, I thought the AF might be broken it was so far adrift of my 1D. Took me around a week to get adjusted to it so that I could get what I considered to be an acceptable hit rate.
 
a1ex2001 said:
I think the main complaint about the AF isn't that it's rubish it just could have been so much more, canon clearly have the technology available but chose no to use it on this camera forcing artificial segmentation of the market to maximise profits.
Click to expand...

And create a market (this year/next) for the uprated AF in the Mk3 (5D) or am I being cynical?
Matt
 
I guess as always that the proof of the pudding is in the eating... I shot a banger racing meet on Sunday and whilst I fully appreciate that old cars whizzing around a grass track are nowhere near as fast as say, F1 cars; the AF on my 40D had no trouble keeping up (and it's the same AF that's in the 5DMKII give or take). Granted the 40D has a much faster frame rate but I rarely do more than double tap anyway so save space on the card.

The AF on the 7D is much quicker and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it make an appearance in a '5DMKIII' at some point.

Si
 
MatBin said:
And create a market (this year/next) for the uprated AF in the Mk3 (5D) or am I being cynical?
Matt
Click to expand...

I think in the world of modern DSLR's it pays to be cynical, the model replacment cycles are crazy and the market is saturated with new models but we have seen very little actual inovation in years, the differences bettween the 20D or 30D and the new all singing all dancing 7D are pretty small when you actually put them side by side and in terms of image quality the difference is even less. Everytime Canon announce a new model I hope to see some genuine inovation and everytime I'm left wondering what all the fuss is about.
 
Spiritflier said:
I guess as always that the proof of the pudding is in the eating... I shot a banger racing meet on Sunday and whilst I fully appreciate that old cars whizzing around a grass track are nowhere near as fast as say, F1 cars; the AF on my 40D had no trouble keeping up (and it's the same AF that's in the 5DMKII give or take). Granted the 40D has a much faster frame rate but I rarely do more than double tap anyway so save space on the card.

The AF on the 7D is much quicker and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it make an appearance in a '5DMKIII' at some point.

Si
Click to expand...

I was shooting banger racing on a 5D 'classic' and I've never had problems with AF tracking with cars, birds or anything else! :shrug:
 
Af has a lot to do with the lens in use too, I have a really old 70/200 (push pull) its hopeless, a slightly newer 70/210 which is a lot faster, but if I put my newer 70/210 on my old 10D it slows down quite noticeably, whereas on the 1D its as fast as my mates 70/200 2.8L (which the swine lent me :) )

Matt
 
In my experience the 5D AF is OK but only really on centre-point. Expecially with fast glass, the other points are not very good.
 
also the 5dmk11 is having to process MASSIVE 21.3 mp files compared to 8mp on the 1dmk11s.
 
How many arms and legs will that cost? :lol:
 
pearce_jj said:
In my experience the 5D AF is OK but only really on centre-point. Expecially with fast glass, the other points are not very good.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. On any of the AF points other than the centre it can be a bit hit and miss on low contrast areas. Great camera though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top