I think I've been using it long enough now to be able to pass some comments. The old 5D was possibly my favourite camera of all time (yes, even including the Rolleiflex), so how does the Mk II compare?

Size - well, it's much the same size and shape as the original, which fits my hands nicely, so no complaints there - it's much easier to carry than a 1D series, but sizable enough to work with any lens combo I ever use.

On resolution, I always thought 12MP was enough, and this wasn't ever a consideration in buying the Mk II. However, there really is a benefit from the extra pixels, and I'm staggered at what the new camera can resolve with the same glass. It allows fairly savage crops, and it immediately made me think of the difference between medium format and 35mm.

Noise - the 5D made me realise the benefits of high ISO working with low noise (for the time). The Mk II is streets ahead - the top setting - 25,600 - is pretty useless, but I happily use up to 6400 as normal - it gives the same sort of noise as the 5D at ISO 800, or the 10D at ISO 400. 12,800 is not as good, but usable in a pinch - somewhere between 1600 and 3200 on the 5D, IMHO. From what I've seen of the D700, there's not a lot in it between the two cameras in real world usage.

Speed - the shooting rate might not be blistering, but it's fast enough for me now, whereas the slightly slower rate of the 5D sometimes wasn't - and more importantly, I can shoot for longer.

Viewfinder - the Mk II is much brighter, a major improvement. At the expense of needing different screens, though.

LCD - possibly the most major improvement, daft as it sounds. I've not yet found conditions too bright to be able to use the screen in, and the resolution is now usable.

Live view - very useful on limited occastions - great on a tripod, even in bright light, but NBG handheld.

HD video - well, it's one reason I wanted the camera. Has to be seen to be believed, the quality ia astonishing, and the ability to shoot full HD video with a fisheye lens, for example, is something else.

AF - for some reason, it seems miles better than the 5D, I've no idea why.

Metering - ah, now here's the one weak point. I've always found Canon's Evaluative metering to be very good indeed, and it certainly was in the original 5D - however, the Mk II does tend to overexpose when shooting landscapes if you're not careful. The biggest issue I have with the camera.

Anti-dust - seems to work. The 5D was a real dust magnet, I've not yet had an issue with the Mk II.

Controls - although broadly similar to the 5D, some things have moved buttons, which was very confusing at first, and makes using it with the 5D or my IR-enabled 30D a bit complicated. Still, the ISO is now constantly displayed, which is better, and the separate AF button is great.

Customisation - as with the original, I use one of the C settings for mirror lock-up at the lowest ISO in aperture priority mode - a handy device. I'll have to work out what to use the other two for. The personal menu is handy, although I wish it had room for one more option.

Battery - it's a pain having a different, and very expensive battery, but battery life is fantastic, so it almost seems worthwhile.

All in all, it's a terrific camera that suits me very well - I do hope that Canon correct the exposure issue with a firmware update, though. And while they're at it, selectable frame rates for the video, please!