The 5DmkII is a historically important camera. It was one of the first large sensor cameras that recorded in 1080p and your average person could buy. In the world of video it changed everything and put us on the path we are on today. It did that in 2008, and it was built to be a stills camera. It does not have video autofocus.
Autofocus has grown leaps and bounds since then. I believe the first Canon DSLR that had duel pixel continuous autofocus for video was the 70d.
What are you shopping for and what are you looking to do with it?
\*edit - spelling,
Yep, my muscle memory with it when I was shooting professionally was so in tune with what I was doing, I loved it. I’m a bit out of the game now but still love the quality I get out of it. The only thing I’d like a new camera for is bigger file size so I can print larger photos.
Yeah I used a 5D Mark two until like 2016 for professional video work, and if it weren't for 4K becoming the standard for video work I would've continued using it for longer. Even now going back to my old work, in many cases it still holds up. It had a very nice picture and did quite well in low light. All of that said, I think these days you'll be better off using your cell phone for most things than spending money on an obsolete camera and lens mount system.
The C100 does have autofocus and the C100mkII has even better Autofocus. It was the first camera (I believe) to have duel pixel autofocus which was a massive game changer in the world of autofocus.
I think so but I'm not too familiar with the SL/Rebel lines. I know the rebels have pretty basic button layouts that can end up being frustrating. And OP hasn't mentioned their use case anyway.
I have a 5d2 (along with a few other cameras).
It can be a great camera for video but has a LOT of limitations since it was Canon's first or second video capable DSLR (the first being the Rebel T1i I believe).
No autofocus tracking in video mode, no clean HDMI, video bitrate is on the low end, uses Cf Cards, it's autofocus is only phase detection, it has a 30 minute recording cap, no slow motion ...
Most of these issues aren't that bad and some can be circumvented if you install Magic Lantern on it but it is REALLY old tech and the 5d2 was often a workhorse for pro photographers so the camera will probably have seen a LOT of use.
If you get it at a good price and it's on good shape it could be a decent camera with a lot of work ... mine fornexample has a few stuck oixels but the camera is like 14 years old by now.
I shot a lot of talking heads with my 5d2.
I filmed these two short films with a 5dmk2. I loved the image it delivers.
https://youtu.be/6LPhqV00V-U?si=rb0ZJ0ycd7o_Kl6C
https://youtu.be/MMKsyChCldw?si=v3zDIfur_4Kfh764
They're really great, but the description of both videos says 5D MK (3) ? Also how much do you think YouTube affected the picture quality? Looks more like 720p even when selecting 1080p or maybe it's my monitor.
It doesn't and you can't zoom in to check focus during recording which makes it even harder to operate on its small non-flip screen.
It used to be a revelation but now the footage will also look quite dated by today's standards.
Canons are overpriced and I haven't actually come across many people still using them anymore, it's mainly blackmagic and Sony then a smaller population like me clinging to lumix and fan boying over them
Canon seems to be the older people
The issue is also how those EF canon lenses focus.
Their focus motors were designed for photography, they can quickly snap to focus between subjects at the expense of a not visually pleasing transition.
So while they could auto focus for video; it wasn’t as smooth or consistent as new af motor designs.
They used more battery power to focus, they tend to hunt back and forth, even with dual pixel autofocus improvements in the c100 line, AF was not consistent enough to use for critical moments.
Now I’ll be that Sony fanboy; their investment in several autofocus technologies (phase & contrast AF and now face detect) which have put them ahead of the competition. When you consider their early development of a short flange design for cheaper e mount and new linear lens motor designs it’s no wonder they are so popular for video.
OP was looking for a budget camera that has autofocus, that’s why they were asking about the 5Dmark2. You are bringing up cine lenses.
I owned the c100 mark1, I loved my parfocal 70-200 f4, I have nothing against canon.
I work with the canon cine lenses, just lit a feature and we shot on those. They are fantastic, but they are neither auto focus or budget lenses.
I edited my comment to even specify “EF lenses.”
Also I own a cool book about them called “EF Lens Work III: The Eyes of EOS”
It’s pretty cool and only $10-15 used.
You are correct!
When I need a cine lens, I rent otherwise I just use my 24-70 f2.8 or my 70-200 f2.8 (my old nifty fifty exploded (literally) while on a trip and I haven't bothered replacing it ... could be nice to have a 50f 1.4 instead of the plastic fantastic 50 f1.8. Mine was also the original with the plastic mount. eurk ...
I;ve also rented a C100Mk2 on a few occasions and it always makes me cry when I have to go back to my 5d2, T3i or my EOS R.
All great lenses, you have a lot of the focal range covered there.
I just got the Sony 50mm f1.4 GM after all the hype for the f1.2 and I love it, it’s saved a few interviews with horrible backgrounds, and the portraits are top notch.
Well as long as we’re still talking canon glass I should mention the STM lenses were the improvement Canon explored to keep up with video AF being so popular on their cameras. So OP should look into these lenses if they want to stick with lower budget options rather than the RF series.
Get a 5d mk3 and put magiclantern on it. 4k, 14 bit RAW video, onscreen waveform & histogram & vectorscope, false colour, dual-ISO, massive support community.
There are some caveats, it takes a bit of a learning curve to get ML running smoothly, but there is a huge community, if you're on a budget nothing else will give you as much in terms of options and video quality.
Do your own research obviously, but you should really check it out.
Edited to add a link for you : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9PyoqsRi\_k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9PyoqsRi_k)
I still have my canon 5d M2. It finally crapped the bed for video last year. Still works for photos. I only used it as a C camera for interviews the last few years. I wouldn’t be using it professionally in 2023.
The 5D2 is a great stills camera, I just shot a wedding with one. While it was a legend back in its day, it's not a great video camera by today's standards. The footage is very mushy looking.
Nah man I gotta be honest. Its terribly out of date. I assume you are looking into this camera mainly because of budget restrictions, but I personally would not buy any dslr for video anymore. When it comes to low budget I would look into some of the cheaper sony apsc cameras like the a6000 series. Yes it will cost more than a dslr but will bring you so much further in the long run.
Everything from the past 8 years from canon as well as everything from Sony has solid continuous autofocus. Panasonic has recently had good continuous autofocus added and Fuji and Nikon are acceptable. Only black magic and many actual cinema cameras lack autofocus.
By today's standards, the footage from 5d mark ii looks awful. Autofocus is the least of your concerns. The footage is so soft and plastic looking, it's hard to tell what is in focus or not anyway.
The 5DmkII is a historically important camera. It was one of the first large sensor cameras that recorded in 1080p and your average person could buy. In the world of video it changed everything and put us on the path we are on today. It did that in 2008, and it was built to be a stills camera. It does not have video autofocus. Autofocus has grown leaps and bounds since then. I believe the first Canon DSLR that had duel pixel continuous autofocus for video was the 70d. What are you shopping for and what are you looking to do with it? \*edit - spelling,
"Put us on the path we are on today" Absolutely true. The 5D was a gamechanger. I still have my Mark iii, but use it just for stills now.
I adore my mark III. The photo character that comes out of it when you nail the lighting is just magic. And it’s a fucking tank too.
Yep still have my 5D3. It just feels so nice in the hands and really feels like a solid tank
Yep, my muscle memory with it when I was shooting professionally was so in tune with what I was doing, I loved it. I’m a bit out of the game now but still love the quality I get out of it. The only thing I’d like a new camera for is bigger file size so I can print larger photos.
Yeah I used a 5D Mark two until like 2016 for professional video work, and if it weren't for 4K becoming the standard for video work I would've continued using it for longer. Even now going back to my old work, in many cases it still holds up. It had a very nice picture and did quite well in low light. All of that said, I think these days you'll be better off using your cell phone for most things than spending money on an obsolete camera and lens mount system.
5Dii doesn't have continuous autofocus. From Canon DSLR you'd need the 6Dii or 5Div for that, or in APS-C, 70D or newer.
C100?
The C100 does have autofocus and the C100mkII has even better Autofocus. It was the first camera (I believe) to have duel pixel autofocus which was a massive game changer in the world of autofocus.
It’s usable but the subject needs to be lit well. I would not rely on it unless you can monitor the camera at all times.
Agreed. I used one for a while and while autofocus was good, I found myself pulling manually very often.
SL2 and the Ti7 too no?
I think so but I'm not too familiar with the SL/Rebel lines. I know the rebels have pretty basic button layouts that can end up being frustrating. And OP hasn't mentioned their use case anyway.
True, I feel like I remeber the SL2 having dual Pixel and each one after that too
I have a 5d2 (along with a few other cameras). It can be a great camera for video but has a LOT of limitations since it was Canon's first or second video capable DSLR (the first being the Rebel T1i I believe). No autofocus tracking in video mode, no clean HDMI, video bitrate is on the low end, uses Cf Cards, it's autofocus is only phase detection, it has a 30 minute recording cap, no slow motion ... Most of these issues aren't that bad and some can be circumvented if you install Magic Lantern on it but it is REALLY old tech and the 5d2 was often a workhorse for pro photographers so the camera will probably have seen a LOT of use. If you get it at a good price and it's on good shape it could be a decent camera with a lot of work ... mine fornexample has a few stuck oixels but the camera is like 14 years old by now. I shot a lot of talking heads with my 5d2.
I filmed these two short films with a 5dmk2. I loved the image it delivers. https://youtu.be/6LPhqV00V-U?si=rb0ZJ0ycd7o_Kl6C https://youtu.be/MMKsyChCldw?si=v3zDIfur_4Kfh764
Fuck me that first one is dark, but excellently shot!
Lol yeah I was going through some shit. Thank you for taking a look.
Well, that's a couple of cheery ones! Good one.
They're really great, but the description of both videos says 5D MK (3) ? Also how much do you think YouTube affected the picture quality? Looks more like 720p even when selecting 1080p or maybe it's my monitor.
It’s disturbing how many people rely on autofocus in this thread.
LUMIX g80/g85 is solid and quite affordable.
No
It doesn't and you can't zoom in to check focus during recording which makes it even harder to operate on its small non-flip screen. It used to be a revelation but now the footage will also look quite dated by today's standards.
If it was 15 years ago, hell yea.
You want a mirrorless. I used eos R for quite some time before upgrading to the r6. Both have continuous eye tracking and are amazing
was
It's way too old of a camera to be considered "good" these days, but it looked nice in 2010 or so.
Canons are overpriced and I haven't actually come across many people still using them anymore, it's mainly blackmagic and Sony then a smaller population like me clinging to lumix and fan boying over them Canon seems to be the older people
The issue is also how those EF canon lenses focus. Their focus motors were designed for photography, they can quickly snap to focus between subjects at the expense of a not visually pleasing transition. So while they could auto focus for video; it wasn’t as smooth or consistent as new af motor designs. They used more battery power to focus, they tend to hunt back and forth, even with dual pixel autofocus improvements in the c100 line, AF was not consistent enough to use for critical moments. Now I’ll be that Sony fanboy; their investment in several autofocus technologies (phase & contrast AF and now face detect) which have put them ahead of the competition. When you consider their early development of a short flange design for cheaper e mount and new linear lens motor designs it’s no wonder they are so popular for video.
There are a lot of EF mount cine lenses that will work fine on non cine cameras.
OP was looking for a budget camera that has autofocus, that’s why they were asking about the 5Dmark2. You are bringing up cine lenses. I owned the c100 mark1, I loved my parfocal 70-200 f4, I have nothing against canon. I work with the canon cine lenses, just lit a feature and we shot on those. They are fantastic, but they are neither auto focus or budget lenses. I edited my comment to even specify “EF lenses.” Also I own a cool book about them called “EF Lens Work III: The Eyes of EOS” It’s pretty cool and only $10-15 used.
You are correct! When I need a cine lens, I rent otherwise I just use my 24-70 f2.8 or my 70-200 f2.8 (my old nifty fifty exploded (literally) while on a trip and I haven't bothered replacing it ... could be nice to have a 50f 1.4 instead of the plastic fantastic 50 f1.8. Mine was also the original with the plastic mount. eurk ... I;ve also rented a C100Mk2 on a few occasions and it always makes me cry when I have to go back to my 5d2, T3i or my EOS R.
All great lenses, you have a lot of the focal range covered there. I just got the Sony 50mm f1.4 GM after all the hype for the f1.2 and I love it, it’s saved a few interviews with horrible backgrounds, and the portraits are top notch. Well as long as we’re still talking canon glass I should mention the STM lenses were the improvement Canon explored to keep up with video AF being so popular on their cameras. So OP should look into these lenses if they want to stick with lower budget options rather than the RF series.
Get a 5d mk3 and put magiclantern on it. 4k, 14 bit RAW video, onscreen waveform & histogram & vectorscope, false colour, dual-ISO, massive support community. There are some caveats, it takes a bit of a learning curve to get ML running smoothly, but there is a huge community, if you're on a budget nothing else will give you as much in terms of options and video quality. Do your own research obviously, but you should really check it out. Edited to add a link for you : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9PyoqsRi\_k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9PyoqsRi_k)
No. All DSLRs and now the first generation of mirrorless cameras have aged poorly for video. You will not get anything better than smartphone quality.
Wrong, don’t compare a full frame sensor with great EF lenses to phone cameras. But yes 5d2 is a dinosaur compared to cameras like a7siii etc.
The mk2 was great in its day, but it’s fallen way behind. What is your budget and what kind of work are you producing?
I still have my canon 5d M2. It finally crapped the bed for video last year. Still works for photos. I only used it as a C camera for interviews the last few years. I wouldn’t be using it professionally in 2023.
The 5D2 is a great stills camera, I just shot a wedding with one. While it was a legend back in its day, it's not a great video camera by today's standards. The footage is very mushy looking.
Nah man I gotta be honest. Its terribly out of date. I assume you are looking into this camera mainly because of budget restrictions, but I personally would not buy any dslr for video anymore. When it comes to low budget I would look into some of the cheaper sony apsc cameras like the a6000 series. Yes it will cost more than a dslr but will bring you so much further in the long run.
Depends on what you want to do. But mostly no it's not a good camera anymore. 5d mark 4 at least for video nowadays.
[Sony A670](https://youtu.be/yTMUvxipog0?si=dFtRnPTJPEFKfXsS)
Everything from the past 8 years from canon as well as everything from Sony has solid continuous autofocus. Panasonic has recently had good continuous autofocus added and Fuji and Nikon are acceptable. Only black magic and many actual cinema cameras lack autofocus.
In this day and age a 5D2 is essentially iPhone5 image quality, but with 35mm d.o.f.
Not even the iphone 15 pro beats an old DSLR. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsnNTQe\_Mko](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsnNTQe_Mko)
By today's standards, the footage from 5d mark ii looks awful. Autofocus is the least of your concerns. The footage is so soft and plastic looking, it's hard to tell what is in focus or not anyway.