My 6D is a lot better sports camera than my 7d

qdrummer21 wrote in post #16748244
Wow just read through this whole thread. Some good information mixed in here and there. I just wanted to add to the anticipation vs. FPS discussion. I have to agree with those who have stated it takes a little bit of both sometimes.

I've been trying to get a shot similar to this one here for about 6 years now. Although I've come very close I've never quite gotten it. The reason being is that with a closure rate of well over 500 nautical miles per hour you have to anticipate the crossing to start pressing the shutter button, but to get the exact alignment of the two planes you need a high-FPS. Human reaction times are just not fast enough to solely rely on anticipation.

For some photos, I'm sure this is true for sports photos as well, a 1/100th of a second difference can have a huge impact on the shot's composition.

this is an interesting photo.

anticipation vs FPS. First shot vs follow up shots.

if you had a 1dx, your shots would be spaced out 71 milliseconds apart (0.71/100th or 72/1000th).
7D 125/1000th of a second apart
6D 222/1000th of a second apart

so to maximize your chances, a 1D3/1D4/1Dx would be the way to go.

might be easier to use photophop to layer the image perfectly

To me it's a ISO issue:
Under ISO 1600:7D, Not even close.
Over ISO 1600:6D, Not even close.

qdrummer21 wrote in post #16748244
Human reaction times are just not fast enough to solely rely on anticipation.

For some photos, I'm sure this is true for sports photos as well, a 1/100th of a second difference can have a huge impact on the shot's composition.

This is the problem, human reaction time is too slow. You can anticipate a second but you simply can not anticipate a tenth of a second.
This is a lot more important when shooting sports, even though the 2 stop ISO difference between the 7D and the 6D is massive.

Charlie wrote in post #16747646
I'll take the 2-3 stops better iso and sharpness.

EDIT: this thread started out as a dad of two kids picking out which sports camera was for him, not a sports illustrated shooter looking to squeeze every bit of performance. Us parents can miss 300 shots and be happy with 3. I'de be happy with 3 I really like than 200 low quality noisy mud.

In a typical sports shoot, you may walk away with say 20 good shots, and 1 or 2 great shots. Ones which you could have easily missed without a high frame rate.
With good fast glass (i.e., 2.8 tele glass not 5.6) you can get clean enough images with the 7D, it's more important to capture the right moment.

canon rookie wrote in post #16748598
To me it's a ISO issue:
Under ISO 1600:7D, Not even close.
Over ISO 1600:6D, Not even close.

Im perfectly fine with the 7D ISO performance.

At 3200

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …_photography/12​997358783/

^^^ nice photo

Brain Mechanic wrote in post #16748728
The 7D perhaps needs more work but can have usable files even at 6400 ISO.

Just note that with just as much work on 6D raw files, you can get usable results at ISO 12800 and even ISO 25600. The ISO advantage of the 6D is huge. The camera has an absolutely fantastic sensor. But, for sports it's a lot more important to have good AI Servo and a fast frame rate.
You know it's about the right tool for the job, both are great cameras.

Mornnb wrote in post #16748674
This is the problem, human reaction time is too slow. You can anticipate a second but you simply can not anticipate a tenth of a second.
This is a lot more important when shooting sports, even though the 2 stop ISO difference between the 7D and the 6D is massive...

I have to call this out. From someone who deals with human performance, reaction time is not a fixed or defined rate of speed. It has been said that human reaction time is 1.5 seconds which is a loose estimate. An average person who is familiar or accustomed to a specific condition can significantly reduce their reaction time.

In regards to this, beat on a dead horse thread, there are variables that can significantly benefit or hinder the sports shooter. Location, light/shade conditions, or subject unpredictability are some. I would question anyone that says fps are the key to getting the best shots for sport. Even the pros have to time their shots on certain condition and still get that money shot.

OuttaCtrl wrote in post #16749016
I have to call this out. From someone who deals with human performance, reaction time is not a fixed or defined rate of speed. It has been said that human reaction time is 1.5 seconds which is a loose estimate. An average person who is familiar or accustomed to a specific condition can significantly reduce their reaction time.

In regards to this, beat on a dead horse thread, there are variables that can significantly benefit or hinder the sports shooter. Location, light/shade conditions, or subject unpredictability are some. I would question anyone that says fps are the key to getting the best shots for sport. Even the pros have to time their shots on certain condition and still get that money shot.

Agreed - it's truly a combination of both. Interesting bit of insight into Olympic venue shooters for Getty and AP here:

http://gizmodo.com …hers-capture-s-1521746623

OuttaCtrl wrote in post #16749016
I have to call this out. From someone who deals with human performance, reaction time is not a fixed or defined rate of speed. It has been said that human reaction time is 1.5 seconds which is a loose estimate. An average person who is familiar or accustomed to a specific condition can significantly reduce their reaction time.


In regards to this, beat on a dead horse thread, there are variables that can significantly benefit or hinder the sports shooter. Location, light/shade conditions, or subject unpredictability are some. I would question anyone that says fps are the key to getting the best shots for sport. Even the pros have to time their shots on certain condition and still get that money shot.

Human reaction time is the problem. You are trying to capture an event that is a tenth of a second, but you can only anticipate 1 or 2 seconds at best. This is precisely why frame rate matters.
Anyone who says FPS is not important to sports photography, completely underestimates how fast sport is.
You do not just sit there bursting the camera at everything, you wait for the ideal second to burst the camera through a series of shots. Anticipation and frame rate are equally vital. A lot happens in one second, and if you have a fast camera you know you can get the shot you want if you anticipate the right moment.

The 7D for example has a 23 shot buffer in raw mode, that is only 3 seconds of shooting. The 1DX is no better with a buffer that will also only last 3 seconds on raw mode. If you just sit there madly shooting at everything you're going to full up your buffer and miss the money shot.

Mornnb wrote in post #16749881
Human reaction time is the problem. You are trying to capture an event that is a tenth of a second, but you can only anticipate 1 or 2 seconds at best. This is precisely why frame rate matters.
Anyone who says FPS is not important to sports photography, completely underestimates how fast sport is.
You do not just sit there bursting the camera at everything, you wait for the ideal second to burst the camera through a series of shots. Anticipation and frame rate are equally vital. A lot happens in one second, and if you have a fast camera you know you can get the shot you want if you anticipate the right moment.

Don't bother explaining yourself.

People that thinks otherwise are clearly non sports pro, amateur soccer mums and dads, or just plain ignorant who settles for mediocre result.

Mornnb wrote in post #16749881
Human reaction time is the problem. You are trying to capture an event that is a tenth of a second, but you can only anticipate 1 or 2 seconds at best.

Utter rubbish. You are seriously trying to tell us that when you are standing there, camera in hand, finger on the shutter button, that it takes you 2 seconds from seeing something, to pressing the shutter button? He he he he he. Pull the other one.

Both cameras have their limiting factors, 2x fast burst speed and AF system on 7D vs 2+ steps better high ISO performance and low light sensitive center point on 6D....

7D was designed to be a sport camera with crop factor, 6D wasn´t, but it is capable to do that if the camera is in right hands with right lenses.
same as 7D - it is pretty capable camera on higher ISO with good post and fast lenses.

i think the OP picked really bad topic name... (don´t know if on purpose or not)

palad1n wrote in post #16750005
Both cameras have their limiting factors, 2x fast burst speed and AF system on 7D vs 2+ steps better high ISO performance and low light sensitive center point on 6D....

7D was designed to be a sport camera with crop factor, 6D wasn´t, but it is capable to do that if the camera is in right hands with right lenses.
same as 7D - it is pretty capable camera on higher ISO with good post and fast lenses.

i think the OP picked really bad topic name... (don´t know if on purpose or not)

Pretty much this, can we lock the thread?

kin2son wrote in post #16749891
...People that thinks otherwise are clearly non sports pro, amateur soccer mums and dads, or just plain ignorant who settles for mediocre result.

I may not be a Pro at the moment but I surely have talked and listen to more Professional Sports photographers than you think. You know the ones that does this for a living and where Canon CPS offers them any and all lenses Canon make for them to use at any event for free. You know, those guys. The funny thing is, they all speak the same tone as I have been speaking of so go figure.

OuttaCtrl wrote in post #16750336
I may not be a Pro at the moment but I surely have talked and listen to more Professional Sports photographers than you think. You know the ones that does this for a living and where Canon CPS offers them any and all lenses Canon make for them to use at any event for free. You know, those guys. The funny thing is, they all speak the same tone as I have been speaking of so go figure.

Haters gonna hate, OC.