Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 12 Oct 2013 (Saturday) 01:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Opinions for upgrading my body

 
Gregg.Siam
Goldmember
Avatar
2,383 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Bangkok
     
Oct 12, 2013 21:12 as a reply to  @ post 16366446 |  #16

It seems you have 2 issues, both resolved in different ways.

new glass- faster, low light ability.

new body- better af, more fps, possibly* better at high ISO

The only option I think for glass is the 70-200. With that said, I don't think f/4 is going to cut it in low light, so you are better off with the f/2.8. The IS version is hella expensive, so it looks like the non-IS version is right up your alley.

So which problem do you want to address first? With a $1,500 budget you can't do both.

I think if it were me, I would rent a 70-200 f/2.8 and see how I liked the results and if no IS was going to work for me.


5D MKIII | 24-105mm f/4 L| 50mm f/1.8 | 600EX-RT [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=bl​ue][FONT="]|
∞ 500px (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jhartley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
110 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2013
     
Oct 12, 2013 22:27 |  #17

Thanks for all the feedback, I'll get back to the more detailed posts after I get some sleep it's been a long day. I know with 1,500 I would address both the focus and glass issues but that's just what I know I will have at a minimum come May when I go on a spending spree. I want to make sure I get all my ducks in a row for what all I should be looking at to get to as close to what I want out of a camera and glass.
Here are a couple examples from the kids game tonight. For both shots they are seconds apart, Shutter speed 1/400, Aperture 4.0, Metering Mode Evaluated Metering, ISO 3200, 75mm, AF Mode AI Servo AF, Center point only for the focus, Exposure Compensation +5. I had the same up and down in brightness when I bumped it up to ISO 6400.

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2863/10237997684_eb4f715b39_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …97948870@N03/10​237997684/  (external link)
IMG_5533 (external link) by jhartley1977 (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2883/10238084006_92fb7a1cb1_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …97948870@N03/10​238084006/  (external link)
IMG_5534 (external link) by jhartley1977 (external link), on Flickr

These are both unedited just converted to jpg from RAW. I know I can fix the lighting post production.

70D 18-135 STM, 10-22mm, 24mm STM, 40mm STM, 55-250 STM, 270EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,640 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 2221
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Oct 13, 2013 07:11 as a reply to  @ jhartley's post |  #18

What shooting mode are you using?

IMO, you would really appreciate some faster glass. The mark one version of the 70-200 IS is a great lens and can be found around 1100 USD. The othe option might be to go for some prime lenses such as the 200, 85 and either of the two normal lengths you are already considering. You will not only pick up a couple of stops, you should see better overall image quality.

I don't think you'll come close to that with anything less than full frame at this point.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jhartley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
110 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2013
     
Oct 13, 2013 13:55 |  #19

Sibil wrote in post #16365278 (external link)
In comparing bodies, the FPS often comes up as a consideration for shooting sports. Both my bodies have machine-gun level of FPS, but I seldom find myself using it. I snap 2-3 frames at most. When I was shooting sports with my 40D, the FPS of it never bothered me. IMHO, the low-light and high ISO performance, as well as the focusing speed and tracking should have higher priority for sports, rather than FPS. YMMV.....
Of course what I said depends on the sports. For example in track and field, a higher FPS body would be very useful.

I usually only take 2-3 shots in a row the problem is the buffer is full and I can't take another shot until it clears out. My kid also does Wrestling and Track and Field.


70D 18-135 STM, 10-22mm, 24mm STM, 40mm STM, 55-250 STM, 270EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jhartley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
110 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2013
     
Oct 13, 2013 14:27 |  #20

amfoto1 wrote in post #16365320 (external link)
First of all, I would not recommend someone wanting to shoot sports jump to a full frame model. In order to get the same telephoto "reach" with FF, you will need to spend a lot more on lenses and your kit will be larger and heavier. The 6D is sort of like a FF 60D, with a less capable AF system and without the articulated LCD of the crop model. Plus for 8x10s you don't need FF at all. In your position, I wouldn't even consider a FF model.

The lack of reach without getting more costly is pushing me away from FF at this point.

I do not know the T3's high ISO performance and you don't indicate what ISOs you have run into trouble with... But you can reliably use any of the 18MP models (T3i, T4i, T5i, 60D, 7D) to ISO 1600 and even 3200 with minimal work. Especially if you are rarely printing larger than 8x10. The 70D has a new sensor and might offer even nicer high ISO performance... Canon says so, but I'm still in wait and see mode, personally.

at 1600 and 3200 there is a good amount of noise on the T3. I'm thinking about renting a 70D to test it for myself in low light and see how it really does.

You can use even higher ISOs, by applying noise reduction in post-processing. There have been significant advances in softwares the past few years, allowing for higher ISO shots. Look for Teamspeed's posts here on POTN about using 7D at very high ISOs for examples and recommendations. The same techniques should apply to any of the 18MP cameras (don't know about the new sensor in the 70D yet).

Thanks I will have to look into that and see what they have to say.

7D is the most advanced of the current models... largest buffer for fast shooting, sophisticated and customizeable AF system. It's also got the highest durability rating of any of the Canon APS-C cameras and relatively good sealing against dust and moisture.

All good points I'm just not liking the compact flash memory system since for years I have only used SD cards. I'm hoping for a 7D2 to be all the 7D is and more with SD card memory. But we'll have to wait and see if and when that comes to light.

The 70D comes close and has some features the 7D doesn't. But 70D is more of an upgrade from 60D, with some 7D features added. In particular, the AF system of 70D is very similar to 7D's, but slightly downgraded. And it doesn't offer the 7D's build level of sealing and durability or 100% viewfinder. But it does offer an articulated LCD screen, which the 7D doesn't. 70D also has a newer, more sophisticated form of focus Micro Adjust than 7D (60D doesn't have MA at all).

I'm leaning towards the 70D currently, I don't think I will miss some of the features the 7D has over the 70D for the AF system, the articulated LCD could be nice to have. I'm not too worried about the 70D not having the 100% viewfinder since I have never had a camera with that so it's not something I would really miss not having. The Micro Adjust on the 70D is something I really think would come in handy.

The 60D's 9-point AF system is perfectly capable of action photography, too. It's a solid step up from your T3's AF. In fact, the T4i and T5i models have essentially the same AF system as the 60D, so should be able to keep up, too.

I haven't given the T4i or the T5i models much thought, I've been kinda set on going past anything from the rebel series to the next level. Not really sure why but I just haven't even considered any of them.

High frame rate is a crutch you want to avoid using too much, unless you have a ton of memory cards and enjoy sitting in front of your computer for days on end editing your photos. Learn to time your shots well, rather than relying too heavily on "machine gun" shooting techniques. 7D has the highest frame rate, but 60d and 70D are pretty respectible, too.

I'm more looking at the higher frame rate as a way to avoid missing something because I took 2-3 shots and my T3 is "busy" writing the pictures to the memory card and it causes me to miss the opportunity for another good shot I could of had. For example I try to get a picture of a tackle and the miss the tackle and the camera is busy and a second later when the next player is actually getting the tackle I don't get that shot due to the camera being busy writing the last shots to the card. Seems like the 60D and 70D would suit me fine in this aspect as would the 7D.

The way I most often use the 8 FPS my pair of 7Ds are capable of is with short, 2 or 3 image bursts. Usually this is with running subjects where a "freeze frame" of the wrong part of a stride can look odd or awkward, and it's near impossible to time. This is sort of like shooting a gun using a "double tap" or "triple tap" technique. You end up trashing a lot more images this way, but increase the odds of stopping the action at a point in the person's or animal's stride that looks "right".

That is about what I try to do myself.

Besides, 7D will actually slow down the frame rate at times, to allow time for metering or AF, or with certain settings. To get a 7D to fairly consistently shoot at it's max frame rate, you have to use M (manual) exposure mode and keep some other features turned off. Plus there really isn't all that big difference between 5, 6 and 8 FPS.

That's part of my thinking to where the 60D or70D would work just fine for my current needs and possible future needs. But leaning towards the 70D due to it being better with Video than the 60D and hoping for better high ISO performance too.

I would encourage you to spend as little as possible on the camera body.... you also sorely need to upgrade lenses and those will ultimately offer more improvement in image quality, as well as support faster, more accurate AF, better sealing and durability.

I am working on upgrading both body and glass.

You should look at the Canon 70-200s, especially. This will be a huge improvement over the 75-300 you have. Some will tell you that you don't need IS for sports photography, but after using IS lenses for 12 years I can tell you it's a very valuable feature on telephoto lenses, especially when they are used on crop cameras. If a 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II is too expensive, look for a used Mark I or consider a 70-200/4 IS. They are both excellent lenses, too. They can be used very effectively with a quality 1.4X, too, if you need a bit more reach.

I have been looking at the 70-200 F4 without IS as I don't feel for sports I will need it due to the high frame rates I shoot at.

Besides a "workhorse" 70-200, it's your choice what other lenses to get. I use a 24-70/2.8 and a couple 28-135 IS. The Canon 17-55/2.8 IS is another excellent lens. An inexpensive choice is the Tamron 17-50/2.8 non-VC.... except it doesn't have USM style focus (which Tamron calls USD), so is rather slow focusing. The Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS is in between in price and has HSM, which is the Siggy version of USM, to give AF speed and accuracy similar to the Canon.

Lens wise as I said above I've been looking at the Canon 70-200 F4 non IS and I've been looking at Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 for city shooting. Canon 40mm f/2.8 Pancake, or the Canon 50mm 1.4, I can't decide which would be more useful or if I would have a use for both. The Sigma 17-50 2.8 you mentioned above.

There are numerous other short zooms, but most are f3.5-5.6 variable aperture, so are going to be less useful in low light situations. Instead you might consider some faster prime lenses, such as the Canon 28/1.8, 35/2 IS and 50/1.4 (all with USM) or the Sigma 30/1.4 HSM (tho it's said to not be so great focusing in low light). A prime lens can give you one or two stops more light than any zoom offers, yet can cost less and is smaller/lighter, too boot. Of course, a prime isn't as convenient as a zoom in some respects.

I find the primes useful for shooting indoors like birthday parties, holidays, or for the kids Wrestling. But with football I feel I would either end up having to crop the pictures a lot or be to close to the action to get a decent shot.

Note that with very wide and ultrawide lenses you may not need a large aperture lens because you can handhold them steady at slower shutter speeds. Often an f4 or f3.5-5.6 will do fine, in a 10-xx or 12-xx zoom.

If I didn't get the Tonkia I would probably get the Canon 10-20mm since it seems to take great pictures.

You also might want a longer telephoto for sports. I use the Canon 300/4 IS a lot, both with and without a 1.4X teleconverter. It's easily handheld and a nice focal length on a crop camera for field sports. There is also the Canon 400/5.6, but it might be a bit long some of the time and doesn't have IS, though it's reasonably compact and handholdable. There are also a number of zooms in the 100-400, 120-400, etc. range.

I've thought about the 1.4X converter to add to the 70-200 if I could get the wife on board with the costs of that plus a f2.8 70-200


70D 18-135 STM, 10-22mm, 24mm STM, 40mm STM, 55-250 STM, 270EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jhartley
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
110 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2013
     
Oct 13, 2013 14:42 |  #21

Gregg.Siam wrote in post #16366484 (external link)
It seems you have 2 issues, both resolved in different ways.

new glass- faster, low light ability.

new body- better af, more fps, possibly* better at high ISO

The only option I think for glass is the 70-200. With that said, I don't think f/4 is going to cut it in low light, so you are better off with the f/2.8. The IS version is hella expensive, so it looks like the non-IS version is right up your alley.

So which problem do you want to address first? With a $1,500 budget you can't do both.

I think if it were me, I would rent a 70-200 f/2.8 and see how I liked the results and if no IS was going to work for me.

I think you are right about the F4 not cutting it I took a number of shots at F4 last night and they were not what I was hoping for. I really think a 2.8 would of done much better under the same conditions.
Since I have 2 years before the kid will be playing only night games I'm not too worried about the f2.8 glass right now. I know if I get a better zoom lens and a better body for focusing I can be fine for now. Last nights game was suppose to be much earlier where I wouldn't of had to deal with full darkness but they bumped game times back due to games that got rained out the week before where had I known that I would of rented a 70-200 f2.8 for the weekend.
As of right now I'm leaning towards a 70D body extra battery with it, getting a Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD, Canon 40mm pancake. at today's prices that is around $1,800ish. I know the image quality and focusing on the Tamron will be far better than my Canon 75-300 I currently have and will work for day games and would still serve me when I make the jump and get a 70-200 L 2.8 or F4 if I need the longer reach. If I have any money left over I'll get a wider lens that has an f2.8 on it for a shorter zoom at that time. I'll then start saving up for a 70-200.


70D 18-135 STM, 10-22mm, 24mm STM, 40mm STM, 55-250 STM, 270EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Imsouthernfried
Member
32 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2012
     
Oct 20, 2013 19:03 |  #22

jhartley wrote in post #16367955 (external link)
I think you are right about the F4 not cutting it I took a number of shots at F4 last night and they were not what I was hoping for. I really think a 2.8 would of done much better under the same conditions.
Since I have 2 years before the kid will be playing only night games I'm not too worried about the f2.8 glass right now. I know if I get a better zoom lens and a better body for focusing I can be fine for now. Last nights game was suppose to be much earlier where I wouldn't of had to deal with full darkness but they bumped game times back due to games that got rained out the week before where had I known that I would of rented a 70-200 f2.8 for the weekend.
As of right now I'm leaning towards a 70D body extra battery with it, getting a Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD, Canon 40mm pancake. at today's prices that is around $1,800ish. I know the image quality and focusing on the Tamron will be far better than my Canon 75-300 I currently have and will work for day games and would still serve me when I make the jump and get a 70-200 L 2.8 or F4 if I need the longer reach. If I have any money left over I'll get a wider lens that has an f2.8 on it for a shorter zoom at that time. I'll then start saving up for a 70-200.

Dont know if it will help, I too was thinking of upgrading from my T2i (550D) but, after coming here, I got better glass. I bought the 7-200/2.8 L non IS off of ebay. It has made a world of difference. Most of these were taken either M or TV, at 500-640 and ISO 1600-3200, ec+5, evaluative, back focus, NO post processing, just from the camera, to pc to fb this past Friday night.. ....Id still like to upgrade to a better body, but for now, it will do. Hope it helps, I have about 50,000 photos on fb and just got the new lens this football season.....https://www.facebook.c​om …3741901.1090911​915&type=1 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,816 views & 0 likes for this thread
Opinions for upgrading my body
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Rlawver
906 guests, 231 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.