Canon 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II: which differences matter most?
Asked 3/30/2014
1 views
2 answers
0
I’m choosing my first full-frame Canon body and am deciding between the Canon 5D Mark III and 5D Mark II. I currently use a Canon 550D and want noticeably better image quality, especially cleaner results at ISO 800, 1600, and above.
From my research, the main differences I’ve noticed are:
- high-ISO performance: the 5D Mark III is said to be better, even though pixel size is slightly smaller
- autofocus: 61 AF points on the Mark III vs 9 on the Mark II, which seems important for tracking subjects and avoiding focus-and-recompose
- HDR mode on the Mark III
- only a small difference in resolution/pixel size overall
Are there other meaningful differences that should affect the decision, especially for someone who wants to grow into more serious photography?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
12y ago
2 Answers
6
The 5D mk2 was released in 2008, the mk3 in 2012, 4 years is a long time in technology.
The mk3 is much better, it is better because of 4 years of sensor technology research, the pixel size makes a difference only if everything else is the same - and when you compare a models that have a 4 years difference everything isn't even close to the same.
If you are not a pro you should probably look into the 6D, according to what I heard (don't have a 6D or a 5Dmk2 to compare myself) it has better high ISO performance than the mk2, it has a similar auto focus as the mk2, it's smaller and lighter than than both the 5D models and it has WiFi - and you get a new one for somewhere in the neighborhood of a used 5Dmk2.
For an hobbyist the 6D is probably a better deal than the 5Dmk2 (not surprising, this is the market this camera was created for), the 5Dmk3 is without a doubt a superior camera but it's also more expensive.
Just a few examples of the differences between the mk2 and mk3:
The mk3 is much better in high ISO (because of the newer sensor technology, that has nothing to do with the pixel size)
The mk3 has what is probably the best auto focus system in the industry at the moment (except for the 1Dx that has a better version of the same system), the mk2 has a below average auto focus, very similar to the 550D
Originally by user2481. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user2481
12y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The 5D Mark III is the stronger choice if your budget allows. Its advantage over the Mark II comes less from pixel size and more from newer sensor/processing technology: despite similar resolution, users report much better high-ISO performance, roughly approaching a couple of stops better noise handling.
The biggest practical upgrade is autofocus. The Mark II’s 9-point AF is adequate for general use, but the Mark III’s 61-point system is far better for tracking movement and gives you more flexibility in composition.
Other meaningful improvements on the Mark III mentioned by users:
- 100% viewfinder coverage for more accurate framing
- faster continuous shooting (about 6 fps vs 4 fps)
- deeper buffer for bursts
- more advanced AEB/bracketing options
- built-in HDR mode
- good long-exposure noise control
The small resolution/pixel-size difference is not important compared with the four years of technology improvement between them.
If your priority is image quality at higher ISO plus better AF and room to grow, choose the 5D Mark III. If cost is the main concern, some users suggest also considering the Canon 6D as an alternative to the 5D Mark II.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI12y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Is the Canon 5D Mark III worth the upgrade over the 5D Mark II?
Canon 6D vs EOS 5D Mark II: key pros and cons for moving to full frame
Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs 1D X for weddings, studio, and outdoor photography
Is the Canon WFT-E7B II compatible with the EOS 5D Mark III?
What are the main differences between the Canon 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III?