5D Mkll


Status
Not open for further replies.

scandi46

New Member
May 2, 2009
2
0
0
#1
Hi!
Could someone advise if the new EOS 5D MKll is worth the bugs vs the old 5D
Cheers, Steen!
Fotograf | Luftfoto
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,709
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#3
Worth is a highly subjective sentiment and more often than not, varies from individual.

Do you know what you need? If you do, you've got the answer covered 50%.

Do you know what you are getting? If you do, you've got the other 50% covered as well.

So I ask...... Do you know?

Don't know but got cash to burn? Then go get the MK II.
 

gazkw

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2009
1,743
1
38
East Coast
www.garygraphy.com
#8
unfortunately only you have the answer.

if it were me and many here, we would say hit it like you mean it! :thumbsup:
 

jlkk76

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2006
2,148
0
0
Tampines
#9
i would say: Go get it tiger! :devil: :bsmilie:
 

krabbie

New Member
Dec 6, 2005
42
0
0
#10
Hi!
Could someone advise if the new EOS 5D MKll is worth the bugs vs the old 5D
Cheers, Steen!
Fotograf | Luftfoto
A newbie question in a newbie section. :D

As mentioned many times, you get subjective answers when your questions are vague. Are you comparing IQ, noise control, features, etc? One man's food is another man's poison.
 

aryanto

New Member
Feb 16, 2005
1,799
0
0
singapore
#11
I have a suspicion this post is just to up his website ranking going by the signature.
To TS: if you are an experienced photographer it would be best to post at canon subsection rather than here, and you should be specific to your question and by the way good is subjective. I say go for it, buy cos it will be good to the shop selling it at least. they make some money and that will help the economy. :)
 

danielli

Deregistered
Apr 26, 2009
34
0
0
#12
With extra cash to burn, I don't see why MkII is not a good option. Too bad I don't have to cash to burn. :sweat:
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#13
The first generation 5D was launched in 2005 while the MK II last year. So difference in technology is also a factor to consider. If u need higher ISOs, full HD video recording and more pixels mainly then the MK II is the choice. If these factors are critical for u then just get it and burn the extra $1K+ cash.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom