Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #1
IncompletePete
Member
 
IncompletePete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 268
Default Best for sports photography?

What would be best for sports photography, I've read loads of conflicting opinions on whether the 10D or the 20D would be better?

PS. I can't afford a Mk II!
IncompletePete is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #2
timmyquest
User is banned from forums
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Outside of Chicago
Posts: 4,172
Default

The 20D
timmyquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #3
Belmondo
Cream of the Crop
 
Belmondo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 92210
Posts: 42,727
Default

The main benefits to the 20D for sports photography is the startup time, frame rate, and buffer size. All are clearly superior to the 10D.
__________________
I'm not short. I'm concentrated awesome!
Belmondo is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #4
maderito
Senior Member
 
maderito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Southern New England
Posts: 1,336
Default Re: Best for sports photography?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
What would be best for sports photography, I've read loads of conflicting opinions on whether the 10D or the 20D would be better?!
I haven't read any conflicting opinions about which would be better. The issue is whether the incremental improvements held by the 20D over the 10D are enough to qualify the 20D a as a legitimate cam for sports photography.

Among the various reviews already published, there is cautious praise of the 20D for its potential in sports photography - not as good as the 1D/1D MKII, but significantly better than the 10D in autofocus speed and focus precision, tracking of moving subjects in AI Servo mode, startup time, max frame rate, CF write speeds (enabling extended shot sequences, especially in JPEG mode), and shutter lag. These are improvements a sports or PJ shooter would want.

Personally, I find that my current 10D does everything I could want except capture good action shots. Any improvement would be welcomed. I'm hoping for a "quantum" level of improvement over the 10D as promised by one reviewer.

The 20D is going to cost twice as much as a used 10D in excellent condition. Is it twice as good – or more importantly, is it capable enough for sports photography? IMO, the jury is still out.
maderito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #5
Persian-Rice
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Behind a viewfinder.
Posts: 1,515
Default

1D Mk1....... thats is your best bang for the buck. If you need to do sports, consider you need a long telephoto, which are the same price or more expensive then the camera itself.

Cheers.
__________________

Persian-Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #6
sGu
Goldmember
 
sGu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,367
Default

1D and 400mm above, plus 70-200mm f2.8 IS ...

that's what i use to shoot football anyway, hope it helps
__________________
Portfolio | Musing

Advertising & Editorial Photographer
sGu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #7
EXA1a
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 242
Default Re: Best for sports photography?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
What would be best for sports photography, I've read loads of conflicting opinions on whether the 10D or the 20D would be better?

PS. I can't afford a Mk II!
Okay, I did read your PS.
20D is the answer. Besides other advantages, most importantly AF is supposed to be really good (close to 1DMkII). Read this:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthrea...o=&fpart=1

--Jens--
EXA1a is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #8
Danny Boy
Member
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 301
Default

Okay, since the subject here is: "Best for sports photography", I do have to ask, is the subject about bodies or lenses? Since I have a DRebel and want to take pics of my daughter at soccer games, I don't really think a new body is a possibility, unless my old parents want to buy me one... out of the question.

Let's talk lenses. 70-200 f/4 or the f/2.8? I'll be doing outdoor stuff (soccer, baseball, etc.) but my little girl like to figure skate. Tough there, eh? I don't want to tug around the 2.8 (twice the price and weight) but should I for the both sports?

Anyone else in this situation?

Dan
Danny Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #9
Andy_T
Compensating for his small ... sensor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,860
Default

Dannyboy,

you might think about the 85/1.8, 135/2.8 or 200/2.8.

Or, of course, the Sigma 70-200/2.8

Best regards,
Andy
Andy_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th of September 2004 (Sat)   #10
Persian-Rice
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Behind a viewfinder.
Posts: 1,515
Default Re: Best for sports photography?

Quote:
Originally Posted by EXA1a
20D is the answer. Besides other advantages, most importantly AF is supposed to be really good (close to 1DMkII). Read this:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthrea...o=&fpart=1

--Jens--
I don't think I ever read anyone saying it is close to the mkII............
It is actually stated that the performance is good, yet not like the 1 Series and they have been shooting with 2.8's. It is even stated that the AF will likely deteriorate as soon as you get smaller then 2.8. Since the 1d's are perfect for AF, that means that the **D's are still too slow, though a good photographer can still deal with that.

The major advantage for sports IMHO is not the fps or even the start up time. Its ISO : noise quality, this way you can use cheaper lenses like the 70-200 f4, but make it fast enough under low light conditions by running a higher ISO with minimal noise increase. Thats the big bonus since it will save you money over the long haul.

Cheers.
__________________

Persian-Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2004 (Sun)   #11
IncompletePete
Member
 
IncompletePete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 268
Default

I am looking into a 1D Mk I, however surely megapixel count isn't good enough to get published....?

Lens-wise I'm fine, I use a 400mm sigma lens mainly, along with a 28-70 EX. Next on my shopping list is a 70-200 L IS!
IncompletePete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2004 (Sun)   #12
defordphoto
MKIII Aficionado
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 9,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
I am looking into a 1D Mk I, however surely megapixel count isn't good enough to get published....?

Lens-wise I'm fine, I use a 400mm sigma lens mainly, along with a 28-70 EX. Next on my shopping list is a 70-200 L IS!
Oh yes it is Grasshopper. 6.5mp is good enough to get published and what used to be the world's best PJ camera, the MKII's baby brother, the 1D, is only 4mp and was published in multitudes of publications daily.
__________________
defordphoto | Celebrating the art of photography®
SD500, 10D, 20D, 30D, 5D, 1DMKII, 1DMKIII
www.ussbaracing.com | www.rfmsports.com | www.nwfjcc.com

An austere and pleasant poetry of the real. Ansel Adams
defordphoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2004 (Sun)   #13
defordphoto
MKIII Aficionado
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 9,888
Default Re: Best for sports photography?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
What would be best for sports photography, I've read loads of conflicting opinions on whether the 10D or the 20D would be better?

PS. I can't afford a Mk II!
The 10D is quite sufficient. I shot sports with mine for close to a year before getting the MKII. However, the 20D is now clearly the choice and much more robust than the 10D.
__________________
defordphoto | Celebrating the art of photography®
SD500, 10D, 20D, 30D, 5D, 1DMKII, 1DMKIII
www.ussbaracing.com | www.rfmsports.com | www.nwfjcc.com

An austere and pleasant poetry of the real. Ansel Adams
defordphoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2004 (Sun)   #14
IncompletePete
Member
 
IncompletePete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFMSports
Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
I am looking into a 1D Mk I, however surely megapixel count isn't good enough to get published....?

Lens-wise I'm fine, I use a 400mm sigma lens mainly, along with a 28-70 EX. Next on my shopping list is a 70-200 L IS!
Oh yes it is Grasshopper. 6.5mp is good enough to get published and what used to be the world's best PJ camera, the MKII's baby brother, the 1D, is only 4mp and was published in multitudes of publications daily.
But 4mp certainly isn't anything to shout about now, especially as most P&S cameras are now 4mp! I guess it'd be fine for small pictures, but for anything bigger it'll just become pixelated.

How much are they going for generally anyway? About $2000 second hand?
IncompletePete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2004 (Sun)   #15
defordphoto
MKIII Aficionado
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 9,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFMSports
Quote:
Originally Posted by IncompletePete
I am looking into a 1D Mk I, however surely megapixel count isn't good enough to get published....?

Lens-wise I'm fine, I use a 400mm sigma lens mainly, along with a 28-70 EX. Next on my shopping list is a 70-200 L IS!
Oh yes it is Grasshopper. 6.5mp is good enough to get published and what used to be the world's best PJ camera, the MKII's baby brother, the 1D, is only 4mp and was published in multitudes of publications daily.
But 4mp certainly isn't anything to shout about now, especially as most P&S cameras are now 4mp! I guess it'd be fine for small pictures, but for anything bigger it'll just become pixelated.

How much are they going for generally anyway? About $2000 second hand?
It'll do 8x10's all day long and also up to about 16x20 with little degradation. Don't underestimate the 1D just because it's only 4mp. It produces an excellent photograph. One advantage the 1D had over the 10D is that its photosensors are much larger and therefor can produce quite an astonishing photo.

They run $2k to $2.2k depending on condition and # of acuations.
__________________
defordphoto | Celebrating the art of photography®
SD500, 10D, 20D, 30D, 5D, 1DMKII, 1DMKIII
www.ussbaracing.com | www.rfmsports.com | www.nwfjcc.com

An austere and pleasant poetry of the real. Ansel Adams
defordphoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
sports photography fox au Sports Talk 7 16th of March 2007 (Fri) 21:39
Sports Photography mark05 RAW, Post Processing and Printing 4 30th of November 2006 (Thu) 08:35
First try at sports photography col4bin Critique Corner 4 13th of November 2006 (Mon) 10:15
Help with sports photography Ron Burgundy Canon EOS Digital Cameras 14 19th of July 2006 (Wed) 14:01
Help! New to Sports Photography! Lozenge Sports Talk 3 21st of April 2006 (Fri) 03:37


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.