My thoughts on the Canon 5D

My thoughts on the Canon 5D

So we're led to believe - and have for a while - that Canon will shortly be releasing the third generation of it's professional 5D DSLR.

Rumours have been around since mid 2010.
As always, there's speculation about its specification, and what it will have to improve on the 5D mkII.

So here are my thoughts, as a time served professional wedding photographer. I've been using the 5D camera for several years, since the price dropped to a reasonable level. Primarily I chose it over the much cheaper 30D, as I didn't want to be shooting a wedding with the same camera as some of the guests.
I hadn't expected it to be so much better.
Firstly, the large viewfinder makes such a difference, and makes any APC-C camera seem inferior. Then there's the satisfying clunk of a full-frame shutter.
And of course, the image quality. I'm no expert - I'm bothered about taking great photos, not the technicalities. The 5D, however, just takes stunning images. For whatever reason. Ok, it's not the best at focusing, especially in low light.

So, it was with mixed feelings I tried a 5D mkII. How could it be any better? Of course there's the extra 9 MPs, but I've never struggled with 'just' 12MP'. Wedding clients generally don't order huge prints.

There's the high sensitivity, but again, none of my clients ever refused a photo due to noise. Then there's DIGIC 4. I've no idea what that is, so it's not an issue.

But.... My first wedding with it was on the 2nd of Jan this year, at a wedding in Scarborough. In the snow. In the late afternoon. In other words, lighting was about as bad as it gets.

I usually use bounce-flash on the 580's pop-up indoors, just for a boost, but hate using full flash. As it was, I spent most of the day on or above ISO 2500, and thanking heaven (well, Canon) for focusing on this aspect.

The results had a little noise, as you'd expect, but nothing Lightroom 3 couldn't easily take care of, without turning everyone into waxworks.
I had my trusty 5D on my other shoulder, but even at f2.8 and high ISO, I ended up sticking to the mkII.

So this makes me wonder what's in store with the mkII. More MPs? Just means more storage space in my opinion. A pull-out screen? Maybe, but of little interest. Higher sensitivity? Useful, in some circumstances. Better weather sealing, ok, you've got me there.

But of course it will come at a cost. Several factors have taken prices in the wrong direction this year.

So I for one won't be queuing up for one.
But then, I was wrong with the mkII, maybe I'll be wrong again?