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 Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
Thread started 18 Sep 2017 (Monday) 16:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens or Camera?

 
shady954
Member
35 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2017
     
Sep 18, 2017 16:53 |  #1

Hi,
Just finished up a season of taking photos of my kids Rugby games and decided to upgrade a little.
Using a Canon 600d with the 50-250 kit lens.
Reach was OK as they were playing on a half field. Next year my eldest moves onto a full field so may need something extra.
Borrowed a 1st gen canon 100-400L last week and noticed an improvement but not a massive one compared to the kit lens.
Happy to buy a Canon 100-400L usm is ii but wonder if its a waste on the 600d and I'd be better served upgrading to a 7dii.
Appreciate your thoughts




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,710 posts
Gallery: 1104 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8051
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Sep 18, 2017 17:03 |  #2

Heya,

Well, moving to a 7D2 you gain some FPS and robust AF and just about barely 1 stop of ISO performance. But, you're still going to be limited by the focal length and focal-ratio (speed) of your 55-250 and the FOV it produces. So little will change in that regard. Distant action is a lot easier to nail, so you may not notice much of anything if you're objective about it. Close range action can be more challenging to the AF system as depth of field crushes down more and you may notice more keepers there with a newer body.

Overall, having more reach on the field gives you more options. A 100-400 is a great thing to have as the field gets bigger. The AF speed of that 100-400 is also a big plus. But, I would actually point you more towards perhaps a Sigma 120-300 F2.8 OS if you're wanting a sports lens with some versatility. Constant F2.8 speed is a big help to keep the shutter speed fast as the light drops. And you can put a 1.4x TC on it and keep really great performance, having it at 168~420 F4 OS at that point, which is better than the 100-400 flavors. It's a big lens, but the F2.8 OS (non-sport) model is not much more expensive 2nd hand than the 100-400's and a heck of a lot better for sports action and will be more versatile. Heck, it can go to a 600mm with a 2x TC even if the light is really good. I'd do this over a new body first.

After that, yea, a new body could help, such as an 80D or 7D2. Used/Refurb 80D's are really affordable too. Or you could shop a used 1DIV. On the cheap, grab a used 1DIII.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shady954
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
35 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2017
Post edited 9 months ago by shady954.
     
Sep 18, 2017 22:08 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #3

Thanks for the help.

I am really having a hard time picking the 'real world' difference in IQ between the kit lens and the canon 100-400. From the reviews I've read they're supposed to be miles apart but for a weekend hack taking photos of the kids it's not that big a difference...
The things I did notice were...
- I missed the 50mm - 100mm range when using the 100-400mm
- The extra range above 250mm was very handy when the kids were playing on a full field
- I noticed the narrower depth of field
- It was physically much bigger and heavier
- The puch-pull zoom thing is annoying

I've had the camera for 4 or 5 years but haven't used it much at all. I've only dragged it out this year at the kids Rugby and have really enjoyed taking photos, editing and sharing them with the other parents in the team via drop box. The other parents have all expressed their gratitude so I'll continue to do it.
I'll check out the market for the 120-300 f2.8 you suggested.

I'll see if I can post a couple below with the kit lens and a couple with the canon 100-400.

Thanks again




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shady954
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
35 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2017
Post edited 9 months ago by shady954. (2 edits in all)
     
Sep 18, 2017 22:13 |  #4

Both photos with the Canon 55-250 kit lens


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,093 posts
Likes: 1593
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
Post edited 9 months ago by gjl711.
     
Sep 18, 2017 22:15 |  #5

shady954 wrote in post #18455401 (external link)
Thanks for the help.

I am really having a hard time picking the 'real world' difference in IQ between the kit lens and the canon 100-400. From the reviews I've read they're supposed to be miles apart but for a weekend hack taking photos of the kids it's not that big a difference...
The things I did notice were...
- I missed the 50mm - 100mm range when using the 100-400mm
- The extra range above 250mm was very handy when the kids were playing on a full field
- I noticed the narrower depth of field
- It was physically much bigger and heavier
- The puch-pull zoom thing is annoying....

If you think that the 3.1 pounds of the 100-400 was heavy, you'll freak at the 6.5 pounds of the Siggy 120-300.

BTW, the IQ is a tab better but if our shooting at f/8 your not going to see much difference even pixel peeping. Also, it really helps to MFA the lens to the body. The 100-400 had a reputation of having soft copies which have pretty much disappeared now that bodies can be adjusted to match the lens. Lastly, the IQ above 250mm totally blows the 55-250 away. :):):)


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shady954
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
35 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Sep 2017
     
Sep 18, 2017 22:16 |  #6

With the Canon 100-400 version 1


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLaird
Goldmember
Avatar
2,166 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 182
Joined May 2008
Location: Inverness, Highlands of Scotland
     
Sep 19, 2017 08:00 |  #7

I shoot rugby in the north of Scotland ... seniors on a Saturday and juniors on a Sunday. Light is usually poor so that is a major factor for me.

I started with 5D2 and 135mm F2 and 1.4 convertor. It was plenty fast enough lenswise. Reach at 200mm a little short and meant standing on sidelines.

I bought 1d3 and 70-200 F2.8 Mk2. So with 1.4 extender up over 300m. Far better reach and of course lots of FPS. However noise on 1D3 was limiting so swap 5D2 for 5D3 (sport is only part of what I do). ISO far better and getting there.

The bought 7D2 and Sigma 150-600.

Worked with this for half a season.

Now at the start of this season I am using 7d2 and Sigma for most of the time. I also stand behind the posts and easily have reach to get usable shots up to opposite 22m line.
I have 5d3 and 70-200 for closer in work.

I have 7d2 and Sigma on a monopod and 5d3 over my shoulder.


Illegitimi non carborundum --- as they said in Roman times ---

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

3,143 views & 3 likes for this thread
Lens or Camera?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
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 shaikh
823 guests, 263 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.