60D + 70-300 IS USM better than SL1 + 55-250 IS II: Lens or body?

Hope the title made sense. I had a chance to use my SL1 + 55-250 IS II combo at a local sporting event recently. Interesting this was, this was almost exactly a year to the day I used a 60D + 70-300 IS USM (non-L) at the exact same venue with the exact same sport. So I got some similar shots except... my keeper rate went down, almost directly attributable to focus. Not horribly so, but more pictures were OOF than last year.

So, I'm just trying to figure out whether this is attributable to lens or body. Obviously not user, since well, I'm the same, used same technique, if anything I've become a slightly better photographer in the last year.

I'm thinking since neither lens is exactly known for its focusing, it must be the 60D's superior AF system, right?

Probably the USM gave you a more responsive AF system.

Also, the larger/heavier camera may have contributed to a better balance and better framing.

Well, I just shot some sports this week with my new 55-250 STM using my 7D, and I did not have any of those issue you described.

Hard to say if its Camera or lens.. From images I've seen in the 55-250 II sample thread, I've seen many sharp images. Don't know much about the SL1, perhaps owners will shine in on its performance

Bianchi wrote in post #16788778
Well, I just shot some sports this week with my new 55-250 STM using my 7D, and I did not have any of those issue you described.

Hard to say if its Camera or lens.. From images I've seen in the 55-250 II sample thread, I've seen many sharp images. Don't know much about the SL1, perhaps owners will shine in on its performance

Well the STM version of the lens is definitely sharper than my IS ii version, though not sure if AF is better as well. As for body, well you are using probably the best APS-C body for sports out there. So can't really compare to SL1 or even the 60D I was using last year

The 55-250 non-STM is a slow focusing lens. If your shots were using AI servo the 55-250 will have trouble keeping up and tracking accurately.

My 55-250 IS (not STM or vers II) is sharper than my 24-105 but the focus is slow and the pictures don't look as good. But it is sharper.

Heya,

The 55-250 IS II is not very fast to focus. This was most likely the issue, compared to an USM based lens. They're simply faster, which results in better tracking when doing action shots.

I've shot soccer with the 55-250 IS II and the 85 F1.8 and man, when you use a really fast aperture USM lens, the autofocus difference will make you wonder how you survive with slower autofocus systems.

Very best,

you used a better lens, and a better camera...so with two variables, there's no way to tell which was the main reason why you had more keepers than before...it's probably a combination of both though...

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16788825
Well the STM version of the lens is definitely sharper than my IS ii version, though not sure if AF is better as well. As for body, well you are using probably the best APS-C body for sports out there. So can't really compare to SL1 or even the 60D I was using last year

A little info on the AF system on the STM

An STM stepping focus motor is also integrated into the lens' design to provide smooth, quiet, and fast focusing performance that is ideally-suited to video applications as well as tracking moving subjects. The rear focusing system, high-speed CPU, and an enhanced AF algorithm also contribute to quickened overall AF speeds. Full-time manual focus is also supported to permit fine-tuning of focus even while working in AF modes. Additionally, the front lens section does not rotate during focusing to better facilitate the use of polarizing filters.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16788722
Hope the title made sense. I had a chance to use my SL1 + 55-250 IS II combo at a local sporting event recently. Interesting this was, this was almost exactly a year to the day I used a 60D + 70-300 IS USM (non-L) at the exact same venue with the exact same sport. So I got some similar shots except... my keeper rate went down, almost directly attributable to focus. Not horribly so, but more pictures were OOF than last year.

So, I'm just trying to figure out whether this is attributable to lens or body. Obviously not user, since well, I'm the same, used same technique, if anything I've become a slightly better photographer in the last year.

I'm thinking since neither lens is exactly known for its focusing, it must be the 60D's superior AF system, right?

could be the SL1 AF or could be the lens, I used the older 55-250IS for sporting events and got plenty of good shots