Canon 5d Mark i

5dc (5dmk1) is known as one of the best "older" photo bodies. Correct me if im wrong photogs.

It's a fantastic camera body.

Ergonomically excellent. Fits well in your hands, built well, great Viewfinder, good battery life, not too huge, not too heavy...

the Autofocus isn't the fastest, and the screen on the back gives a green-tinge to your photos so it makes them look weird, but the files you get from the 5Dc are phenomenal. Killer image quality. There are plenty of pros who still use them.

and for 400? Shit, that's a great deal. I remember I bought mine for like 650 and had to sell it shortly after because I needed money and was more into video at the time.

I've since switched to Nikon, but in years time, I'd probably pick one of these up, because it's still going to be great even in 3 or so years.

You got a hell of a deal on a great camera with a new shutter. Super jelly, enjoy it!

Correct me if I'm wrong... but the 5d mk1 doesnt have video capabilities right?

stupendous-manCorrect me if I'm wrong... but the 5d mk1 doesnt have video capabilities right?

Nope, and as a photo camera, who gives a shit.

Walter.1337Nope, and as a photo camera, who gives a shit.

This. I shoot Nikon now, and I'd probably still jump on this for 400 with a new shutter. It's practically a new camera..

Score! I picked mine up for $650 with a grip a few years ago. It's crazy that it was a $2000-3000 camera up until the 5d2 came out a few years ago. I've never had issues with the autofocus, I think its faster than the MK2, I don't use burst anymore either. I shoot a ton of night club events at ISO 1600-3200 with a flash and the files are adequate for a camera of this age. I've also made a ton of 20in prints at school with it and there is negligible difference over my friend's Mk3 prints. TBH if mine were to die for some reason I'd probably just buy another one, its so cheap for what your getting.

What a deal!

zbphotoI've never had issues with the autofocus, I think its faster than the MK2

Yeah, I'm pretty sure each of them have the same system borrowed from the 20D. Neither is particularly good, and if anything the mk2's is more spread out, but regardless the only time you'll have an issue with it is in dim light, where you'll have an issue anyway.

I kinda love the fact that the 5Dc is so pure-photo, as well. Everything now is being used for video so often that the merits of their abilities as still-photo cameras are an afterthought. The 5Dc is so OG.

DingoSeanI kinda love the fact that the 5Dc is so pure-photo, as well. Everything now is being used for video so often that the merits of their abilities as still-photo cameras are an afterthought.

Best part about owning a 5dc;

"Hey Zack, can you do video? I need someone to film..."

NOPE! SORRY! NADA!

zbphotoBest part about owning a 5dc;

"Hey Zack, can you do video? I need someone to film..."

NOPE! SORRY! NADA!

Or you could, you know.. ask them how much they're paying you haha. Unless I have some project in mind, I always charge for video because its so much more of a process...

It's 'old' in the sense that it isn't the latest and greatest, but it was/still is a great camera. If you're thinking about putting money into anything, put it into nice lenses. Camera bodies come and go, but nice lenses are never a bad investment!

Its my 5th day using it right now, and i am so incredibly stoked on it.

I can tell i got one hell of a deal now, no pictures I've taken have ever looked better!

Great camera. It's outdated in the sense it doesn't really have useable ISO 3200, a smaller LCD and no video. Apart from that, it's a beast of a camera.
It's also prettty widely accepted (I think) that the 5D classic has the best color rendition of any Canon body. I sure as hell think so anyway.

I have one and I love it. It has only the features you need, so the menus are pretty simple, which makes it easy to use. The AF is good, it's no 1-series, but it isn't bad by a long shot. Image quality is great, and the images seem to have a lot of character. It won't make up for shitty composition, but I've taken pictures of shit on my desk or for eBay listings and even those look great with it.

Great camera.

Bought mine in 2005 and the shutter count went well past the 250,000 mark before I replaced the shutter.
Agree with so many previous posters; with a new shutter it's practically a brand new camera, as long as the sensor is healthy (and if it was also loved and well taken care of by the previous owner...).

Minus:
A little poor performance at high ISOs. The LCD-display isn't up to par with newer stuff. Also, its auto-focus is a bit antique (not too bothered as I'm mostly using manual focus anyway). And it's not as well weather-sealed as the Mk II or the Mk III.

Plus:
The format of the body. I use mainly a 1Dx these days and it weighs a ton and intimidates people. The size of the 5D-models is great if you want to keep bit of a lower profile. With a clean sensor its image quality is absolutely superb. With a decent pack of lenses you can't really go wrong with it.
Don't know if it proves anything but nine years later, I still keep my 5D as a backup!

Just invest in good lenses from now on (better one great lens than three crappy ones) and build from there.
At $400, it sounds like a steal.

Honestly, a 5Dclassic is one of the best affordable digital pairing cameras to go with your Pentax/Olympus/Yashica/M42 lens system...

I mean, 135's are like 20-30$, a 50mm from anyone will cost you around 25 or less, and a 28 might cost you 40-50 or so.. an extra 15 for 3 adapters and you have such a solid system to go on. Pair lenses with a film camera and you're solid for around 100$ more than the body.