2
\$\begingroup\$

Now I am using Canon 5D mark II, I want to upgrade my camera into Mark III. I want to know what is the difference between each them.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ There you go, answer within 12 minutes. \$\endgroup\$
    – Matt Grum
    Nov 5, 2012 at 12:49
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I upgraded earlier this year... and I've to admit this may not have been worth the price (maybe better now that the 5DMIII is cheaper). If you tell us what you are expecting from that upgrade, what you think it will help you achieve, than I might be able to confirm it will achieve just that. \$\endgroup\$
    – sebastien.b
    Nov 5, 2012 at 20:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ok.. will wait for 5D mark III cheaper. Thanks @sebastien \$\endgroup\$
    – Flowers
    Nov 6, 2012 at 6:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ possible duplicate of What are meaningful deciding factors when deciding between Canon 5D mark III vs mark II? \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    Mar 31, 2014 at 2:06

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
7
\$\begingroup\$

That is any easy thing to found out :) Just compare the cameras. Here I've done it for you.

As you can see there are several differences. 22 MP vs 21 MP which is really pretty much the same and so is 0.2" difference in LCD size. What is much more significant:

  • The 5D Mark III has a 100% coverage viewfinder. With the Mark II you can never see exactly what will be in your images through the viewfinder.
  • The ISO range reaches 25600 vs 6400 (or 102400 vs 25600 expanded) which hints that the 5D Mark III is better in low-light and actually it is.
  • The Mark III shoots 50% faster, 6 FPS vs 3.9 FPS and for longer.
  • The Mark III also has an updated and much faster autofocus system. This fact is not shown in the comparison but you can see that it has 61 AF points to work with which is great for tracking moving subjects.
Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
5
\$\begingroup\$

Here's what I would say are the differences roughly in order of how much they actually matter. If you are predominantly a stills photographer:

  • Vastly improved AF system (essentially the same as in the 1DX, 60 points, much better performance with f/4 and f/5.6 lenses.

  • ......

  • Faster max shooting speed.

  • 100% viewfinder.

  • Slightly more robust/ergonomic body.

  • Expanded ISO Range plus slightly better ISO performance in RAW.

  • Silent shutter.

  • Slightly better screen.

  • New menus/customisation options, in camera HDR

  • ......

  • Very slightly higher resolution.

If you are predominantly a videographer:

  • Lack of aliasing

  • Ability to output clean HDMI signal with firmware upgrade.

  • Timecode & AllI compression in camera

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

The two main deciding factors are:

61-AF points on mark 3

much better ISO performance in mark 3.

You may only want more AF-points for tracking objects, but I believe that even if you do still photography is good to have the option to avoid focus and recompose. I have a Canon 550D, with 9 AF points, like your mark 2, and sometimes it can frustrating, trying to focus and recompose, because of the lack of an AF-point. I know that the central AF-point is always the fastest and the most accurate, but there are times you can't follow this.

High ISO levels are much more in mark 3 and the noise is much less, according what photo examples on the Internet tell.

Hope it helps somehow!

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ What's your source for "much better ISO performance"? According to DxOmark, the difference is only about a third of a stop. I know DxOmark isn't the be all and end all, but it's a good starting point. \$\endgroup\$
    – Philip Kendall ♦
    Mar 31, 2014 at 10:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is a website comparing the two models with different ISO numbers each time: cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/…. \$\endgroup\$
    – Morpho
    Mar 31, 2014 at 11:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Morpho That comparison is of in-camera JPEGs produced by each camera. One of the advantages of shooting RAW files is that you can take advantage of improvements in the RAW converters years after a picture was taken. Look at sites that compare RAW files from each camera when both cameras are using the most up to date convertor engines. \$\endgroup\$
    – Michael C
    Apr 2, 2014 at 0:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ So these pictures are Jpeg, Michael? How can I know that? \$\endgroup\$
    – Morpho
    Apr 2, 2014 at 10:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Because it says so right at the top of the page... \$\endgroup\$
    – Michael C
    May 25, 2015 at 7:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.