Having used my Canon EOS 5D extensively for about two years, I figure it is about time for me to write up something about my experiences with and impressions of this camera. Rather than try to compete with the existing camera review sites and post a bunch of technical specifications and test results, I’m going to focus on aspects of the camera that may give a better general idea of its strengths and weaknesses and of situations for which it is best adapted.

That said, here is at least a little technical overview of this camera. The 5D is a 12 megapixel full-frame DSLR, having a sensor whose dimensions are essentially the same as those of 35mm film exposures. This may be the most significant distinction between the 5D and less expensive Canon and other cropped sensor camera bodies with smaller sensors. (This is not the only difference and it is not necessarily true that the added cost of a full-frame DSLR is a good investment for all DSLR shooters – more below.) Aside from the larger sensor (and lack of a built-in pop-up flash) the 5D is in many other ways similar to the X0D series of Canon cameras of similar vintage – e.g., the 30D and 40D, with a similar user interface and a body that is similar in size and weight.

The 5D was introduced about three years ago (as I write this) at a cost of more than $3000. While this price was a lot higher than that of the comparable X0D models, it was also a lot less than the other primary full-frame option, the approximately $8000 Canon 1DsM2. For this reason the camera attracted a lot of buyers for whom the potential image quality advantages of the 12MP full frame sensor made the cost worthwhile but who couldn’t afford the 1 Series body… or who didn’t want to deal with its size and weight. The body is used by many serious amateur photographers but it is also used extensively by professionals. You’ll find a lot of Canon landscape and wedding photographers using it, for example.

Because the 5D is now about three years old (about a century and a half in digital camera years, or so it seems…) it lacks some of the features found on newer models from Canon and Nikon, including dust reduction systems, extra large displays, faster burst mode, and so forth. In the context of the DSLR world, today it seems like a highly competent but somewhat basic camera – which is not necessarily a bad thing. In addition, over its lifetime the camera’s selling price has dropped significantly. It is easy to find a new, fully warranted copy today for a price not much above $2000, and used copies are available for less than $2000 – making it more competitive with crop sensor bodies on a price basis than it was originally.

Since the larger sensor is the most significant difference between the 5D and less-expensive Canon and competitor’s cameras, it makes sense to ask what difference the larger sensor makes and how significant these differences might be.

Advantages/differences as compared to cropped sensor bodies include:

• Potentially higher image resolution. With the larger photosites of the full frame body (in comparison to a cropped sensor with the same number of photosites) you keep a bit more between yourself and the resolution fall-off of your lenses. One simplistic way to think about this: Lenses are sometimes evaluated in terms of how many “line pairs per millimeter” (lp/mm) they can resolve at a certain level. Clearly there are more millimeters to hold line pairs on the larger sensor.
• Better low light and/or high ISO performance. If all else is equal, larger photosites can produce an image with less noise. (There are some other variables make a direct comparison cameras with the same number of photosites a bit complex, including sensor improvements that have reduced the space between photosites and thus improved the noise and low light performance of sensors with densely packed photosites.)
• Greater range of wide angle lens choices. Because a full-frame DSLR captures a wider angle of view than a crop sensor camera with a given focal length, you can get ultra wide coverage with a large number of lenses on full frame; the options are considerably more limited on cropped sensor cameras. (Cropped sensor camera fans who use very long lenses like to point out that their cameras can get “more reach” with longer lenses.)
• Narrower depth of field at a given aperture. At a given aperture depth of field decreases as you move to larger sensors/film format. Some estimate that you would have to open up a lens on a 1.6x cropped sensor by nearly two additional stops to get the same DOF that you get on a full frame DSLR.
• Greater number of useful apertures. As you stop down a lens, there is a point at which diffraction blur begins to decrease image sharpness. There are disagreements about exactly where this becomes significant, but little disagreement that it becomes significant nearly two stops later on full frame than on crop. If diffraction begins to become a potential issue beyond about f/8 on a cropped sensor body, it will not be an equivalent issue until about f/16 on a full frame body. If you use one of the f/2.8 Canon L zooms on a crop sensor body you might feel good about using f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, and f/8… and start to worry about diffraction somewhere around f/11. On the full frame body you get f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, and f/16… and become concerned about diffraction at around f/22. (Keep in mind that this doesn’t so much gain DOF at the f/16 end of the scale – it gives you narrower DOF options at large apertures.)

Are there any negative effects from the larger sensor?

• Some who specialize in photography using long telephotos point out that when they shoot at the limits of their longest lenses, it makes more sense to fill a crop sensor frame with 12 MP of image than to have to crop a full frame 12 MP image – thus losing data – to get the same angle of view. This is probably a valid issue when lens length is a limiting factor or when keeping the equipment smaller might be important. Most photographers will be unaffected by this issue.
• Cost. Cameras with larger sensors cost more and this isn’t likely to change any time soon. Costs will drop, but at least a while longer there will be otherwise wonderful cropped sensor camera at lower costs than their full frame equivalents.
• Generally slower burst mode operation. While this problem will likely go away before long, the 5D only shoots in roughly the 3 frames per second range. This is not an issue for most photographers but for those who really need faster rates, cameras with smaller sensors are the way to go.

Flash

The 5D does not include a built-in pop-up flash. Depending on your ideas and shooting preferences this could be a good thing, a bad thing, or just plain no big deal. (I’m in the latter category.) Reasons for not including such a flash on this camera include: a bit more bulk in the pentaprism area of the camera, recognition that high quality flash performance (and that’s what buyers of a camera at this price point likely want) will not come from a built-in unit, but will require an external flash. On the other hand, there are those who point out that a built-in flash wouldn’t be a bad thing to have in situations where you don’t have your external, where you just want a bit of quick fill-flash, or if you want to use it to trigger slave flashes.

Low Light and High ISO

In normal lighting situations (e.g., – day time) at ISO 100 the 5D produces wonderful image quality. It is almost free of noise. (No DSLR is completely noise free, and you can still see a bit of noise in shadows and underexposed areas if you look very closely, but nothing that would be an issue in even a large print.) ISO 200 seems to be almost indistinguishable from ISO 200. ISO 400 is great. There is a bit more noise, but I don’t worry about it if I need the higher ISO and photographs turn out just fine. For me ISO 800 is the point where I start to think carefully about IQ. While very good image quality is available at ISO 800, you will be able to detect noise, both luminance and chromatic if you look at all carefully at a photo. For the most part it is controllable in post-processing and unless you make very large prints and inspect closely most people won’t find it objectionable at all. I’ll shoot at ISO 1600 if there is no other choice, but for me this is getting into a range where I’d prefer to not have quite this much noise.

The camera also works well for very long time exposures. I do some night photography and I’ve done exposures of up to 15 minutes with good results. Do turn on the long exposure noise reduction feature if you do very long exposures or you will have some very obvious hot pixels and noise in your photo.

Handling and durability

I’m not the roughest camera handler in the world, but I don’t exactly baby my cameras either. A lot of my photography is done while I travel on foot – walking, hiking, backpacking, even cross-country skiing – and on regular occasions I work in wind, rain, dust, ocean spray, and snow. So far I haven’t had a single problem that I could chalk up to the camera’s inability to handle these conditions.

The camera’s interface is well know. Major controls are accessed and set by buttons and/or a roller wheel on the top of the camera and a rotating wheel on the back. Once you learn the camera you can make adjustments quite quickly. There are a few quirks – as on most any camera. These include: the oddball “direct print” button that virtually no one uses; the lack of a mirror lockup button (this must be set via menus); and the confusing (for me at least) way that aperture control jumps from one dial to another as I switch between aV and M modes. Oddly, some of the less expensive Rebels provide one feature that I think would be very useful on a camera that is likely to see use on a tripod – the ability to view the current exposure settings from the back of the camera display. They are shown on the top display on the 5D, but it can be hard to see this display when the camera is on a tripod.

What about shooting active subjects?

One of the criticisms of the 5D is that it “can’t shoot sports” because of its slow burst mode. There are a several ways to think about this. First, it is true that other cameras (the 40D and the 1D series, for example) can shoot at twice the fps rate and faster. If that sort of burst speed is required in your photography, the 5D isn’t going to provide it. Another way to look at it is to recognize that it isn’t that the 5D has no burst mode – it is just slower. In most cases and for most photographers the approximately 3fps rate of the 5D is actually fast enough. And then there are those who feel that burst mode is not necessarily the best way to shoot active subjects, and that getting single well-timed shot may be a better approach. (Frankly, I’m sympathetic to both the “learn to fire at the right time” school of thought and the “spray and pray” approach – since both have worked for me at times.) For my part, I’ve managed to photograph sports including windsurfing and professional bicycle races with the 5D.

So, how much better will my photos be if I move from crop to the 5D?

It depends.

For some photographers the differences can be significant – though I tend to think of them as a matter of degree rather than “night and day.” For others the advantages are going to be essentially nil. Frankly, unless you clearly understand how the full frame format may benefit you (and “it is magical” or “it is the best” aren’t what I have in mind by this) there is every chance that you’ll be very happy with a cropped sensor camera, and indeed they can produce very good photographs.

If you make good size prints – let’s say 13″ x 19″ and larger – on a regular basis, and you shoot with good technique and good lenses, and especially if you shoot highly detailed subjects in which good resolution is important, and “double especially” if you like working at ultra wide focal lengths… the 5D can be a great camera. This probably describes a lot of urban and wild landscape photographers, for example – and you’ll find a lot of them using the 5D.

If you are fond of working with very narrow depth of field and in controlled conditions where you can work carefully and slowly – maybe portrait photography? – the 5D can also be a great choice.

If you are shooting photos for printing at letter size or so and/or you mostly share electronic versions of your photographs in email or on the web… a good cropped sensor camera could well be a much better choice for you since you are almost certain to not see any significant difference in your images.

If you are a serious sports or similar photographer who lives and dies in the land of 6-10 fps burst mode… well you already know that the 5D is not going to be your camera. A 1D or even a 40D can do better on this type of work if high speed frame rates are a must. (Note: they are not that important for non-specialist photographers, and you can do quite a lot even with 3fps.)

If money is no object and you don’t mind carrying and using a very large a bulky camera and you want the highest sensor resolution currently available from Canon, coming up with the funds for a 1DsM3 could make sense. (Though 5D users will be reassured to know that their camera can compete well at all but perhaps the most extreme prints sizes.)

What makes the 5D right for me?

I value the high resolution images I can get from the 5D with my (mostly) L lenses. I tend to work from a tripod, using MLU and a remote release, so I’m able to get image quality that fully takes advantage of the full frame 12MP sensor. Part of my work involves landscape photography, often with ultra wide angle lenses, and the 5D excels at this. Since I often work on foot – sometimes on extended hikes or multi-day backpacking trips – the lighter weight of the 5D makes it a great full frame body choice.

What about the next version of the 5D? Should I wait for that?

Personally, right now (summer 2008) unless I needed a full frame camera like the 5D right away for some very compelling reason, I would probably wait a bit. It is very likely that it won’t be long before we find out where Canon is going next with this model. At that point we might find that a newer version has compelling features and capabilities that make it’s likely higher price worthwhile. Or perhaps not, in which case 5D cameras – used or on clearance – may well become an even better deal.

Normally, I’m skeptical about waiting for the Next Great Thing, but in the current situation I’d be more tempted than usual to wait a bit. It sure seems like Canon is overdue for updating this camera, and there are plenty of rumblings about an upgrade if you pay attention to the rumors – and without an upgrade Canon will risk losing its market position to Nikon in this segment.

On the other hand, if you know that you can’t afford the likely $3000 price of the upgraded 5D and you can afford a $2000 new or perhaps a less expensive used 5D now and your needs match up with its feature set, the current 5D is a wonderful photographic tool.

G Dan Mitchell Photography
About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

(Basic EXIF data is available by “mousing over” large images in blog posts. Leave a comment if you want to know more.)