How relevant is the 5D mark ii currently?

W

wluprocks

Member
This may be the wrong place to ask this, but basically I'm a freelancer looking to upgrade from my Canon 60D and am considering the 5D mark ii or AF100. Is it too late to jump on the 5D bandwagon? I think I would enjoy working with the AF100 more, but with the cost savings of the 5D and the fact that clients drool over the idea of using it I think it could end up paying off more. I'm mostly worried that the days of the 5D are going to come to an end soon since it has been out for a few years and people may not jump at the idea of using an AF100.

I know the differences between the 5D and AF100 in terms of functionality and how the AF100 is a 'real' video camera...I'm asking more from a cost-benefit point of view. Thoughts?

Edit: There is another similar thread to this where the user asked for thoughts between buying an FS100 and a 5D, but that quickly derailed into people talking about the mark ii vs mark iii. Regardless if you think the mark iii is a better choice, do you think that the 5D gravy train is coming to an end? I'm nearly certain that I would enjoy using the AF100 more, but its not worth it if clients don't want to use it (I'm in a small market - Milwaukee) and I would need to charge clients more if I got the AF100.
 
Last edited:
My opinion would be: if you already have a 5D2, it's a fine camera, and it still works as well as the first day (or, with ML, actually better). But if you're shopping for a new camera, it may not be the best option anymore. The D800 is better for video, and spectacularly better for stills, if those also matter to you. If you don't mind the 2.3x crop sensor, the BMC records RAW video, which is a huge deal if you're ready to go with a RAW workflow. Even my new NEX-5N feels like a great improvement over my (APS-C) Canon.
 
It's the steal of the used market right now. I have seen them for $1500 in my area and if I needed another one I would jump on it. When a new camera comes out old cameras don't stop working. It's a great camera. Are there now better cameras out, absolutely, but Full Frame for $1500 or $1600 is a great deal.
 
Im not fan of the 5d - owned since day one

But your question was about clients, yep a lot of clients ask for it

I think the current 'hot' cameras are the bmd and the FS700 (240fps) how long they will keep asking for the 5d I dont know

As for using it? well Id take my FS100, (or an AF100) on 9/10 jobs if it were me..

As for the D800/5d3 - too expensive IMO unless you need stills and vid

S
 
As usual, I agree with Gonzo entermainment. I think people tend to forget a cam is just a tool, and depending on the type of shoot, it can make life easy or unbearable while shooting. For narrative, i AGREE it's a great cam that produces a very cinematic image due to it's soft look and baked in colors. It will make nice looking images in 2040 if you still have one.

Last eve, (cape cod) there was a beautiful sunset, It rained about a half hr before, it was a cinematographers dream. I grabbed my old XHA1 with a redrock, and threw on some old fd legacy glass, I wanted the beautiful soft, grainy look the setup produces. I also brought the gh2. And for what it's worth the A1 footage looked much much better to me. There was a certain aesthetic that the gh2 couldn't produce. My long winded point is that their tools. A painter doesn't want to use a latex bush to work with oil paints, sure it can be done, but at what expense. So yes, the 5d is and will produce graet images for certain work, even if it were ten yrs old. Heck I still see plenty of dvx100 and canon xl1 footage thats still great looking.
 
Thanks for the comments everybody!

Samuel H said:
My opinion would be: if you already have a 5D2, it's a fine camera, and it still works as well as the first day (or, with ML, actually better). But if you're shopping for a new camera, it may not be the best option anymore. The D800 is better for video, and spectacularly better for stills, if those also matter to you. If you don't mind the 2.3x crop sensor, the BMC records RAW video, which is a huge deal if you're ready to go with a RAW workflow. Even my new NEX-5N feels like a great improvement over my (APS-C) Canon.
Click to expand...

Well right now I am choosing to upgrade my camera rather than my edit suite and from what I'm aware my Mac Mini(latest model) would not be able to handle the BMC files, if thats not true I would take a closer look at it and I'll definitely look into the D800.

As far as buying a camera from a tools perspective goes I really believe I would prefer the AF100 as I loved my old DVX and could produce great images out of it by the time I sold it(FS100 is out of price range due to cost of getting accessories) but what tears me is the client issue. Around here it seems that people jump on the 5D and when I've mentioned the AF100 you hear crickets in the room.

Edit: Actually the BMD is really tempting, I have a Mac Mini 2.7 GHz Intel Core i7 and currently 8GB of RAM...is that enough processing power? I understand I would be able to transcode the footage, but editing in RAW would be fun.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
It's the steal of the used market right now. I have seen them for $1500 in my area and if I needed another one I would jump on it. When a new camera comes out old cameras don't stop working. It's a great camera. Are there now better cameras out, absolutely, but Full Frame for $1500 or $1600 is a great deal.
Click to expand...


:thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top