Comments on: Canon 5D Mark II Reviews and Resources

By: PIXU

PIXU — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 08:46:13 +0000

Still a little bit expensive to me but I’ve been able to test it, and it’s quite a great camera.

By: William Spiritdancer

William Spiritdancer — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:12:02 +0000

A Collection of Canon 5D Mark II Test Footage for filmmakers:
http://dancingwithlight.blogspot.com/2009/09/collection-of-canon-5d-mark-ii-test.html

By: Yan

Yan — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 18:42:26 +0000

For those new 5Dmk2 owners, here’s a iPhone pocket guide:

http://www.sixdgree.com/handi_5dmk2.html

By: Ali

Ali — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:50:28 +0000

Canon will come out with a better flagship camera. They aren’t just going to stop with the 5d Mark II. From what I have heard, the firmware does fix the problem with the spots for the people that had this problem.

By: Hochzeitsfotograf Berlin

Hochzeitsfotograf Berlin — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:44:29 +0000

Crazy, EOS 5D has the same resolution (21.1 mp) then the EOS 1Ds Mark III. Who needs the EOS 1Ds now?

By: MXKY

MXKY — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:34:26 +0000

Is the 5D Mark II really suffering of lighting dots? This is a bit strange, some people say that this could be corrected with a simple firmware, some others say that there is a real problem in the sensor fabrication? :/

By: Bill

Bill — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:30:15 +0000

And I will admit – I am not a “Pro.” I did some commercial work and weddings years ago, but now its just for my own pleasure.

By: Bill

Bill — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:28:58 +0000

Thanks, Roderick -

I think about the time before I could afford “pro” quality power tools for woodworking. I bought a lot of stuff at Sears – OK stuff, but they would add features that never worked quite right. They concentrated more on having some useless feature than on making the tool a solid performer for the task it was supposed to do. I’m not saying this is the case here – I am a Canon user, and have been for 40 years – but it seems to me that adding video to a camera is just adding a feature that most of us will seldom use. I cam honestly say for all the time I have used my DSLR’s I have never said – gee, I wish this could do video!

By: Roderick

Roderick — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 21:30:08 +0000

Amen Bill.

These manufacturer’s are creating a rod for their own backs. First they threw in sensor cleaners – now a camera gets dumped on for not having it. Now it’s onto the video nonsense…all the while some fundamentals continue to get compromised.

I don’t believe this Wadworth fellow is a “pro” by any stretch – he wouldn’t be using this camera for his “pro” work…LMAO. His little rant about Canon deliberately omitting features, makes his comment about not angering a support group all the more funny.

What is a wad worth anyways?

By: Bill

Bill — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:48:27 +0000

I don’t know why you consider this dysfunctional – you state that “Canon has deliberately omitted a full manual exposure setting for the video mode.” I assume you work for Canon and know for a fact that this was deliberately omitted – that leaving this out was a conscious decision. To what end? So that those who need to have this feature would have to purchase a separate video camera? You say its a slap in the face of the professional, but later state that this camera is not designed for the professional – somehow you don’t seem to understand that this was not designed to be a primary video camera. The video function is just a “bonus” to the functionality of the camera.