40D vs 5D for Action

I'm pretty sure that the conventional wisdom around here is that the 40D is a much better option for shooting sports/fast action than the 5D Classic. But I am confused.

I finally picked up a 5D after years of shooting with XXD line (currently 40D). I took both cameras and my 85/1.8 to my child's gymnastics practice the other night, which is in a typically under-lit old gym.

The 40D struggled, which was not a surprise to me. But the 5D did surprise me. It, for the most part, overcame the lighting, and it's AF speed and accuracy got the job done as well. I understand the FPS and the AF in general is not on par with the 40D, but based on one comparison I would have to say the 5D would be my choice for indoor stuff like basketball, volleyball, etc.

Has anyone else experienced this? I had no thought at all of using the 5D to shoot action, just really took it along because it was new (to me) and wanted to play with it.

Now of course I'm wondering about other FF options. I realize the 5D3 is a very capable action shooter, but how much better would the 5D2 or 6D be than the 5D?

Thanks.

Having a 5d I think the af is quite good. I have said here tgat I believe the hype about it being poor is over rated. Admittedly it isnt a dedicated sports camera. Cant really comment on the 6d apart from user reports saying af is good but I think the 5d2 af is identical to 5dc

^the center focus Is great BUT when you want to use the outer focus point, Its pretty sad It just hunt and almost never lock focus.

Using center point with expansion on the 5D will be mostly sufficient for alot of sporting events, some birding, etc. Try to compose your shots using one of the outer points, or no expansion turned on, and your keeper rate will drop.

The 5D2 shares the same AF, so there is no improvement there. The 5D3 is a mini 1D in relation to its AF and is a very big step up.

I also find the 5D up to the challenge of indoor HS sports. My 60D is faster, but like you, I was just experimenting. I used the same 85 1.8 lens, I might add.

I am curious. Did you have the expansion (hidden) AF points enabled? I shot my 85 1.8 and Σ 70-200 2.8 with them enabled and the 5D did just fine. I just picked up a Tamron 28-75 and the AI-Servo performance of that lens, with the expansion points enabled, is useless. With them shut off, it is orders of magnitude better. Oh, I am a center-point-only shooter, 98% of the time.

Most likely the USM could react faster to finer tuned AF values than the Tamron, so you might have been catching the Tamron mid-AF. Just a guess.

Your story is missing a few details How the did the 40D struggle, and how did the 5D overcome it? I have both and when you have enough light the 40D is better for action, but the SD is cleaner at higher ISO so it might be an option in a dark gym.

gonzogolf wrote in post #16069823
Your story is missing a few details How the did the 40D struggle, and how did the 5D overcome it? I have both and when you have enough light the 40D is better for action, but the SD is cleaner at higher ISO so it might be an option in a dark gym.

It was the ISO advantage with the 5D that made a difference. The ISO advantage doesn't surprise me, but I just wasn't expecting the 5D to be adequate (or better) at action based on all I've read about it.

I haven't done the head-to-head in good light, but I'm sure the 40D will be better. I use it all the time with no complaints for outdoor daytime sports.

5Dc user here.
No problem with sports and AF. Even if light isn't perfect.
It just has to be lens with USM.

Thanks to everyone for the replies.

kf095 wrote in post #16069884
5Dc user here.
No problem with sports and AF. Even if light isn't perfect.
It just has to be lens with USM.

As far as this goes, I guess I was wrong to be surprised by the 5Ds capability, and maybe I've overlooked or ignored posts that point that out. Regardless, I am very happy to stumble on to this.

it's really about know the capabilities of the camera and working to overcome it's shortcomings. I can make an educated guess on light levels to know when the outer points will start getting sketchy. Newer cameras are better, but that doesnt make older cameras suddenly useless.

I shoot outer focus points more often than not, and get by just fine.

I think it gets pigeon holed based on two things,

Vs. the 1D series for action, it trails.

Low FPS.

Personally, i find FPS tends to be over rated,. and clearly the fact that it can't keep up with a 1D in no way should mean it trails behind the XXd series, to the contrary, Back when the 5D was current, I knew a lot of 1D and 1Ds shooters that had 5Ds as well,.. very few of them had 30Ds or 40Ds.

Outside sports the good ol' 40D can rock it out...

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/patrickf117/9​091115534/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/patrickf117/8​960343455/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/patrickf117/8​981095877/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/patrickf117/8​981136162/

mpix345 wrote in post #16069171
Has anyone else experienced this? I had no thought at all of using the 5D to shoot action, just really took it along because it was new (to me) and wanted to play with it.

Now of course I'm wondering about other FF options. I realize the 5D3 is a very capable action shooter, but how much better would the 5D2 or 6D be than the 5D?

Thanks.

I've never shot with a 5D but I have shot with the 5D2, 5D3 and the 6D. I'd put the 6D between the 5D2 and the 5D3 as far as AF accuracy, leaning more towards the 5D2 side of the spectrum. That doesn't mean the 6D sucks, I've found mine very good and the outer points quite useable. Better than my 50D, which is the same AF system as the 40D.

I will pick 1dmk3. I know no FF but to me 5dmk2 AF was just same as 5dc when I had both. Higher ISO on 5dmk2 was better so that might help in low light but then I will pick older 1 series for its better AF and tracking for sports.

Outdoor sports in good light I will go even cheaper with 1dmk2.