The 5D Mk II focuses the same as any other DSLR in low light . . . it is the lens that makes the difference. If you lens is not a constant F/stop throughout the zoom (ex. F/3.5 to F/63) it will always have trouble in low light conditions.

. . . or get a faster lens that can "see" in low light situations.

You don't have to be fast to shoot a picture like that old bear . . . you just have to fast to get away after you took the shot :lol:

It's amazing how the answer to all problems is to fix the symptom in PP instead of curing the cause. What happened to having the image come straight out of the camera correct without the need of a "fix"?

"Camera shake" would not leave part of the image in focus . . .

Yes . . the camera does have that feature as an auto focus choice, but he says that he is focusing manually. In manual focus the camera has no ability to interfere or in any way influence the focusing.

Now your talking! One should try to get images with "pop" straight out of the camera with proper lighting and exposure.

It appears like some of the members here are misunderstanding DOF.
DOF is an area that is in "acceptable" focus . . not perfect focus. Yes an increased DOF, by using, for example F/16 or F/22 might "hide" the fact that the point of focus is not in focus, but with close inspection one would find that it has just become "acceptable" . . not perfect focus. Using only F/16 or F/22 would really limit the conditions under which one could take pictures. I'm sure what the question here was, why is what I am focusing on not in "perfect" focus as it should be.

This image doesn't look real, as the original you edited it from doesn't look real. Making an image "pop" should not make it unrealistic.. Maybe try a different image to edit. One that starts off rather flat.

No . . you're not misunderstanding . . you are quite right. In this case DOF has nothing to do with the issue.

Are you using a calibrated monitor? LCD monitors have a tendency to have too much contrast and blow images out.

Jim . . . Firstly let me say that the problems here are not from you lack of skills in PP. These problems should be corrected in camera . . not in PP.
The blue is a result of the cloudy day and the fact that you were using auto white balance . . . should have been set at "cloudy".
A bigger problem is that all of the images are underexposed. Under exposure by one F/stop lowers the image quality by 50% and throws off white balance . Here are a few suggestions:

1) Under all circumstances set the camera's white balance to the type of light (cloudy, sun, incandescent, florescent, etc.) Try to get out of the habit of auto white balance unless your shoot is presenting quickly changing light conditions. With auto white balance, even the color of the clothing people are wearing can cause the camera to choose a different setting. At least when you choose a fixed white balance setting like "cloudy", all the images will be the same and make post processing much easier.

2) Expose for the subject . . . not the scene. The underexposure here is caused by the bright sky and the bright white dress, telling the camera it had too much light. Under these circumstances you should be shooting with your camera set to manual. Take a shot up close on the bride's face in TV mode with the shutter set at 1/200th second. Check your histogram to check exposure (don't rely on what you see on the LCD), then set the camera to manual with the same aperture that gave you the best exposure and the same ISO and shutter speed. You are that way basically using the camera as a light meter.

3) Fill flash always helps as it adds sparkle to the subjects eyes and fills shadow areas. Set the flash exposure compensation down just far enough so that you can't tell it has flash (so it doesn't look flashy) Usually about - 2/3rds will do fine. This situation, where the sky is so much brighter than the foreground, makes it impossible for the camera to capture both extremes. No digital camera, or film camera for that matter, has that ability. Without flash, to try and light the subject to the same brightness as the sky, you have to decide if you want the subject properly exposed, or the background/sky properly exposed. The camera cannot do both. Since it's the bride that's paying, I would favor her.

4) Always shoot in RAW so that you have 10 times the chance for correcting white balance, over exposure and under exposure, etc.
I did a little tweaking here. . . white balance, white point, black point :-D

Gary has a good point here. Another issue could very well be that the screens that Canon supplies with these DSLRs is not designed for manual focus. On some models they can be changed with optional screens available from Canon . . . not sure about your model, but it's worth looking into if you insist on focusing manually.

There are definitely times when manual focus is necessary to get the desired results, and auto focus is really an acquired skill. Canon has an excellent video on auto focus on their web site that should be read by everyone that has a DSLR. It could eliminate the hundreds of threads on forums for people not understanding the limitations of auto focus.

For those of you responding to this thread suggesting that the problem could be a wide aperture of F/1.8 . . he did not say his exposures were made at F/1.8 . . . he simply was stating that his lens is an F/1.8 model. Save yourself the time by reading the questions asked very carefully before adding your suggestions please.

Looks like a "pop" to me . . . just tweaked the curves a little. Also changed the composition as I am a nut for subjects being centered.

Nice shot!

Wonderful capture. Nice to find someone who can "see the light"

Love your light! Nice shot. My only critique would be that it a bit too symmetrical and would be improved by having the main subject a bit off center. Think the "rule of thirds"

Congrats on a nice capture.