Pondered the switch, and made the switch.

[Gavjenks]

And is there any way to check the shutter count from home? I was told it had less than 10k clicks, but I'd like to be sure.

If there isn't a native menu option, Magic lantern should give you this information.
It may have been developed for video but offers oodles of non-video stuff, like that, or like built in intervalometer options without needing to buy or carry around a plugin accessory, and so on.

 

[Gavjenks]

SUper-Takumar 200mm f/4

I looked it up and Holy **** that thing only weighs 4 ounces? Is that actually right? That's the same as the gerbil sized plastic 50 1.8!

 

[DNel928]

I am really curious for this move.
Moving from top of the line DX body to a very old FF body seems like a rather illogical move to me.
Please don't take this as a shot or criticism as I don't mean that at all but I would like to understand why making this move.
If you wanted to moved to a FF body why not go for the D700 or for at least the 5D II.
Just like you I am VERY eager to move to FF body, I can do the jump if I wanted to the D610, I have the cash but for me the D7100 is so good that I rather hold on to the D610 replacement and then pull the trigger.
For me I found the D7100 only flaw and that's basically the flaw of every crop sensor camera is low light performance in everything else its the perfect companion.

Congratulation on your new camera.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved the D7100. The 5D is an absolutely awesome camera, and the lack of features is a bit daunting at first. I like the challenge the lack of features gives me opposed to the D7100 as well. If I have to work a little harder for the same shot so be it.

My biggest goal was getting into a FF camera, and the $550 price tag of the 5D was awesome. I sold the D7100 and grip for enough money to afford the 5D, 50mm f1.8, and the 24-105L. The 5D was one of the greatest cameras in the world when it was released in 05? or 06, so why wouldn't it be enough for an amateur such as myself? The 5DII isn't a big enough advancement imo. I never shoot video, and the leap in resolution won't really matter much to me at the moment.

I understand your curiosity. Sometimes I puzzle myself with the same thought, but in the end I am happy I made the switch.

Yes my end goal is FF but in my case it either be complete modern or I will stick to crop sensor, I still dont understand since you were with Nikon and had Nikon lenses why not get the D700 ?
From what I understand the D700 is still a very good FX camera and is better then the 5D and you can get it for 1000$ or even less.
This is not a Nikon vs Canon, if you would have upgraded to 5D II or III or even 6D I wouldnt say a thing as I would understand your move, those are excellent cameras but the 5D was good 8 years ago but now.......well its left behind.

All my glass was for a DK Nikon body to begin with. Since I sold it all at once I thought it would be a great time to switch over to Canon. I personally like Canon more, so I made the switch. The 5D is excellent, I love using it.
A D700 crossed my mind, believe me, but I just wanted to get into a Canon system. I looked at the 5DII but the features are not worth $700 more over the 5D which is practically the same camera. I probably won't be in a 5DC for long before I jump into a 6D or 5D3. I just bought some good glass and the body will catch up later on. I have in no way been limited by the 5D yet.

 

[JacaRanda]

I am really curious for this move.
Moving from top of the line DX body to a very old FF body seems like a rather illogical move to me.
Please don't take this as a shot or criticism as I don't mean that at all but I would like to understand why making this move.
If you wanted to moved to a FF body why not go for the D700 or for at least the 5D II.
Just like you I am VERY eager to move to FF body, I can do the jump if I wanted to the D610, I have the cash but for me the D7100 is so good that I rather hold on to the D610 replacement and then pull the trigger.
For me I found the D7100 only flaw and that's basically the flaw of every crop sensor camera is low light performance in everything else its the perfect companion.

Congratulation on your new camera.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved the D7100. The 5D is an absolutely awesome camera, and the lack of features is a bit daunting at first. I like the challenge the lack of features gives me opposed to the D7100 as well. If I have to work a little harder for the same shot so be it.

My biggest goal was getting into a FF camera, and the $550 price tag of the 5D was awesome. I sold the D7100 and grip for enough money to afford the 5D, 50mm f1.8, and the 24-105L. The 5D was one of the greatest cameras in the world when it was released in 05? or 06, so why wouldn't it be enough for an amateur such as myself? The 5DII isn't a big enough advancement imo. I never shoot video, and the leap in resolution won't really matter much to me at the moment.

I understand your curiosity. Sometimes I puzzle myself with the same thought, but in the end I am happy I made the switch.

Yes my end goal is FF but in my case it either be complete modern or I will stick to crop sensor, I still dont understand since you were with Nikon and had Nikon lenses why not get the D700 ?
From what I understand the D700 is still a very good FX camera and is better then the 5D and you can get it for 1000$ or even less.
This is not a Nikon vs Canon, if you would have upgraded to 5D II or III or even 6D I wouldnt say a thing as I would understand your move, those are excellent cameras but the 5D was good 8 years ago but now.......well its left behind.

I have no idea if the 5D is considered a classic, but would you understand better if it were a classic car or motorcycle etc? He mentioned being happy with his choice. I can totally understand that.

 

[goodguy]

All my glass was for a DK Nikon body to begin with. Since I sold it all at once I thought it would be a great time to switch over to Canon. I personally like Canon more, so I made the switch. The 5D is excellent, I love using it.
A D700 crossed my mind, believe me, but I just wanted to get into a Canon system. I looked at the 5DII but the features are not worth $700 more over the 5D which is practically the same camera. I probably won't be in a 5DC for long before I jump into a 6D or 5D3. I just bought some good glass and the body will catch up later on. I have in no way been limited by the 5D yet.

Well I really love the 6D and of course the 5D III, I think you will be quite amazed about the low light performance of the 6D.
Well good luck on your quest, its always nice to start something new from scratch and slowly develop it.

Enjoy

 

[Derrel]

SUper-Takumar 200mm f/4

I looked it up and Holy **** that thing only weighs 4 ounces? Is that actually right? That's the same as the gerbil sized plastic 50 1.8!

That must be a typo...according to this it's 550 grams, or 19.4007 ounces...so, a wee bit more than 4 ounces!

S-M-C/Super Takumar 200mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

 

[lennon33x]

That must be a typo...according to this it's 550 grams, or 19.4007 ounces...so, a wee bit more than 4 ounces! S-M-C/Super Takumar 200mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I've gone back and forth and back and forth on something like an m42 mount 135 f/2. But I had experience using an FD to EOS adapter with a 50mm macro. And I HATED it. I have the Rokinon (that you hate Derrel) and it's super sharp, but MF, so I don't mind it. I just didn't know how good those things were

 

[Derrel]

That must be a typo...according to this it's 550 grams, or 19.4007 ounces...so, a wee bit more than 4 ounces! S-M-C/Super Takumar 200mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I've gone back and forth and back and forth on something like an m42 mount 135 f/2. But I had experience using an FD to EOS adapter with a 50mm macro. And I HATED it. I have the Rokinon (that you hate Derrel) and it's super sharp, but MF, so I don't mind it. I just didn't know how good those things were

The advantage of the majority of m42 lenses, like the Super-Takumars for example, is that they have an Auto/Manual diaphragm switch, or slider, on the barrel, and it allows the lens to be focused wide-open, and then with one press of the Auto/Manual switch, you can close the lens down to the pre-selected shooting aperture, without the need to "count click-stops" to get to say, f/8. With a Nikon lens for example, it would be like 2/2.8/4/5.6/8, or "four clicks" that need to be counted in order to go from wide-open and down to f/8....with an m42 lens, ONE, single press!

Also, the m42 adapter for EOS is glass-free. NO need for a glass element to achieve infinity focus. If you go to like the manual focus forum on-line, there are a lot of user reviews of various lenses. I think the Super-Takumar 135/3.5 has lovely bokeh. In the late 1960's, the Pentax Spotmatic and the Super-Takumar lenses were popular with professional photographers in Europe; these old lenses were "professional-caliber" lenses in their day, before the full ascension of Nikon, and before Canon really had anything decent. Canon cameras at that time were pretty clunky machines, and the Nikon F Photomic FTn and FTN models were big, ungainly beasts.

 

[DNel928]

I was lucky enough to be a candidate of the mirror issue with the 5D. Not 500 clicks after owning it she went haywire. Kind of happy about it overall though. It had dust in the viewfinder and on the sensor which will now be cleaned by Canon along with firmware updates blah blah blah...

 

[lennon33x]

The advantage of the majority of m42 lenses, like the Super-Takumars for example, is that they have an Auto/Manual diaphragm switch, or slider, on the barrel, and it allows the lens to be focused wide-open, and then with one press of the Auto/Manual switch, you can close the lens down to the pre-selected shooting aperture, without the need to "count click-stops" to get to say, f/8. With a Nikon lens for example, it would be like 2/2.8/4/5.6/8, or "four clicks" that need to be counted in order to go from wide-open and down to f/8....with an m42 lens, ONE, single press! Also, the m42 adapter for EOS is glass-free. NO need for a glass element to achieve infinity focus. If you go to like the manual focus forum on-line, there are a lot of user reviews of various lenses. I think the Super-Takumar 135/3.5 has lovely bokeh. In the late 1960's, the Pentax Spotmatic and the Super-Takumar lenses were popular with professional photographers in Europe; these old lenses were "professional-caliber" lenses in their day, before the full ascension of Nikon, and before Canon really had anything decent. Canon cameras at that time were pretty clunky machines, and the Nikon F Photomic FTn and FTN models were big, ungainly beasts.

So I searched on 500px and holy [expletive] [expletive] Batman! I was trying to link them but it wouldn't let me. You weren't lying about the bokeh. I'm gonna be a second shooter at a wedding next weekend and would love to see what that could do.

Note - after going to my desktop, I could link them.

http://500px.com/photo/24088275

http://500px.com/photo/427573
http://500px.com/photo/27369283

 

[mckeonkent]

The new Canon 5D Mark III from Canon truly sets a new standard among DSLRs. With an array of improvements over the 5D Mark II, you WILL be able take better quality video. The only question, is CAN you?
Although this camera is featured widely on the internet as a great HD video recording camera, it is not for everyone. You need to know how to properly use it, else you will end up like many of the people griping about the camera. While the equipment has made great leaps since the mid-80s when I started, users have taken a step back in terms of understanding of video. Newer generations can't take the time to learn their cameras. However, if you do take the time to learn it, and really study DSLR filmmaking, you are sure to make great videos. And no, you don't need an XLR input on a DSLR. There are many reasons why Canon did not include those types of audio connections on the upgraded 5D Mark III, and I won't get into that here. There are plenty of alternatives including external audio (like the real pros do it) or adapter boxes like the one from Juicedlink.

All in all, this camera is a great step above the 5D Mark II and I highly recommend it :thumbup:

 

[lennon33x]

The new Canon 5D Mark III from Canon truly sets a new standard among DSLRs. With an array of improvements over the 5D Mark II, you WILL be able take better quality video. The only question, is CAN you? Although this camera is featured widely on the internet as a great HD video recording camera, it is not for everyone. You need to know how to properly use it, else you will end up like many of the people griping about the camera. While the equipment has made great leaps since the mid-80s when I started, users have taken a step back in terms of understanding of video. Newer generations can't take the time to learn their cameras. However, if you do take the time to learn it, and really study DSLR filmmaking, you are sure to make great videos. And no, you don't need an XLR input on a DSLR. There are many reasons why Canon did not include those types of audio connections on the upgraded 5D Mark III, and I won't get into that here. There are plenty of alternatives including external audio (like the real pros do it) or adapter boxes like the one from Juicedlink. All in all, this camera is a great step above the 5D Mark II and I highly recommend it :thumbup:

Really not sure why this is here (or relevant)

 

[JosephW]

While yes i'd get better overall low light performance, i think i'd rather stick with something that is easier to manipulate. Although, given the chance, i'd swap a 5D for my Oly any day.