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 28 Mar 2010 (Sunday) 17:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 5DMK2 autofocus better than 40D for sports?

 
PNPhotography
Senior Member
Avatar
803 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Mar 28, 2010 17:25 |  #1

Can anyone here comment on the speed and acuracy of the 5DMK2 autofocus for sports (mostly track but alot of Bball) vs the 40D? I might buy the 5D and was wondering if it's capable in this area.
Thanks!!
Paul


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jemanner
Senior Member
625 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Panaca, NV
     
Mar 28, 2010 17:34 |  #2

Not very knowledgeable in this area, but autofocus speed is primarily a function of the lens, and other attributes are camera-based as I understand. The 5DMK2 is very flexible as to autofocus parameters.


Jim

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Likes: 22
Joined May 2007
     
Mar 28, 2010 20:09 |  #3

You may choose to look at the 7D instead.


www.SnapLocally.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jacuff
Goldmember
Avatar
2,581 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Searcy, AR
     
Mar 28, 2010 20:28 |  #4

The center point on the 5D Mark II is very good when compared to the 40D's center point. However, the other points are better on the 40D. It's a capable camera but it wouldn't be my first choice to shoot sports with.


Gear, Feedback (eBay (external link)), Web (external link), Blog (external link), FB (external link), Twitter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
803 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Mar 29, 2010 16:20 |  #5

Thanks for the replies!! I do maybe have a chance to get one pretty cheap and was wondering if I'd be better getting a 7d instead,but FF is always inviting.
Paul


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2005
     
Mar 29, 2010 19:42 |  #6

An accomplished professional motorsports photographer has posted two collections of action images taken with both the 5D Mk. II and the 40D. From the look of those real-world images, either camera can handle the job.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
primoz
POTN Sports Photographer of the year 2005
Avatar
2,532 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Anywhere where ski World cup makes its stop
     
Mar 30, 2010 01:03 |  #7

5d (mk2 or not) has good af only for those, who can't afford 1d. Seriously, when it comes to af for sport, there's unfortunately just one option... 1d. Is 5d better then 40d? Maybe for very small percentage, or maybe it's worse for very very little bit. In general they are about same, and when it comes to sport, they are really hard to work with.
7d is better, even though it's still nowhere near 1d. So if you can't afford 1d, go with 7d. And for sport, not having FF is actually good thing.
Before someone jumps on me... I agree you can make great sport photo with 5d, 40d or even 400d. But when you need consistent results, and you have to bring specific photo back from event, not just one out of 1000 photos, you like body which makes it capable.
PS: Someone wrote, af performance is on lens. It's not really true. 80% of af performance depends on body. Body has af sensor and "computer" to calculate it. If this part is slow, even fastest lens won't help. So personally if I would need to choose (just about af speed), I would rather have 1d with 70-300, then 300d with 300/2.8. Once again... this is just concerning af speed, not other things like constant aperture, sharpness etc.


PhotoSI (external link) | Latest sport photos (external link)http://www.photo.si (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Billo78
Senior Member
Avatar
351 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Adelaide - South Australia
     
Mar 30, 2010 01:20 |  #8

I own both cameras and can report that the focussing on the 40D is significantly faster and better than the 5D2, especially on non centre focussing. The 5D2 is a beautiful camera for weddings, portraits and landscapes but a terrible camera for sports (it's also 2 fps slower than the 40D). If your main reason for getting the camera is sports then stear clear and get a 7D (I've not used one but by all accounts the focussing is signifacntly better than the 40D), if however you shoot a whole bunch of different stuff and sport is one of many reasons to get the camera then you could go for the 5D2, just expect to be frustrated sometimes.


Photography Blog (external link)
Adelaide Based Wedding Photographer (external link)

Gear: 5D2, 40D, 580 EX II, 430 EX II, Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, Sigma 50 f/1.4, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 18-200 OS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
int2str
Goldmember
1,881 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
     
Mar 30, 2010 01:24 |  #9

The 5D Mark II sucks for sports! Whomever is saying that it's "ok" for sports probably never used anything better. The 7D is *miles* ahead of the 5D II for sports.

Now sure, somebody is going to post some great looking sports photo, but frankly, I don't care. How many shots were taken to get that one great one? The 7D's auto focus is rock solid. The 5D II recently fell flat with a simple kids birthday party where the kids used a little zip-line indoors - not exactly hot sports action.

For sports, I'd take a 7D over the 5D II, 50D (owned before), XSi (owned before that) etc. any day of the week.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SnapLocally.com
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Likes: 22
Joined May 2007
     
Mar 30, 2010 09:20 |  #10

I concur with the 7D over the 40D in performance. I really do like the 40D and have gotten great shots out of it, but the 7D makes life easier, particularly with it's AF features, higher and cleaner high iso's, and dynamic range.


www.SnapLocally.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AdamLewis
Goldmember
Avatar
4,120 posts
Likes: 52
Joined Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Mar 30, 2010 09:34 |  #11

int2str wrote in post #9897870 (external link)
The 5D Mark II sucks for sports!

I think we need to clarify this statement by changing it to "The 5D Mark II, when Im using it, sucks for sports ;)

Whomever is saying that it's "ok" for sports probably never used anything better.

Ive shot with a 20D, 30D, 40D, 5D, 5DMkII, 1DMkIII, D3, and D700. I think the 5D2 is 'Ok' for sports.

The 7D is *miles* ahead of the 5D II for sports.

Now this I will agree with 100%. Between the two, the 7D will be MUCH better than the 5DMkII for sports.

Now sure, somebody is going to post some great looking sports photo, but frankly, I don't care. How many shots were taken to get that one great one?

Ive posted them before numerous times so Ill spare you the pain, but it really didnt take any more shots to get keepers with the 5DMkII (or 5D for that matter) than it did with any of my other cameras. In fact, as a percent of total shots taken, Id say I had a higher keeper percentage with those two bodies than anything else. Ill admit that those numbers are probably misleading and are really only attributable to the fact that I didnt take nearly as many pictures with those bodies. Shooting with 5D bodies (Classic or MkII) is just harder. It requires you to really read whats getting ready to happen. You cant just react to something and hang on the shutter like you can with a MkIII or 7D. Any monkey with a MkIII and a telephoto can luck into good pictures at 10FPS but it really takes a serious amount of ability and timing to get the same great pictures from slower responding bodies.

The 7D's auto focus is rock solid. The 5D II recently fell flat with a simple kids birthday party where the kids used a little zip-line indoors - not exactly hot sports action.

I havent used a 7D personally nor do I know the particulars of where you were when you shot this kid's birthday party so I wont comment on this.

For sports, I'd take a 7D over the 5D II, 50D (owned before), XSi (owned before that) etc. any day of the week.

Again, Ill agree with you 100% on this statement.


With regards to the OP, IMO, the 40D and 5DMkII AF about the same. I think the 40D is a little bit more responsive though which makes shooting anything action-oriented much easier.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jemanner
Senior Member
625 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Panaca, NV
     
Mar 30, 2010 10:30 |  #12

primoz wrote in post #9897808 (external link)
PS: Someone wrote, af performance is on lens. It's not really true. 80% of af performance depends on body. Body has af sensor and "computer" to calculate it. If this part is slow, even fastest lens won't help. So personally if I would need to choose (just about af speed), I would rather have 1d with 70-300, then 300d with 300/2.8. Once again... this is just concerning af speed, not other things like constant aperture, sharpness etc.

Thanks for the clarification on this. What you say makes sense, presuming one does not have a non-Ultrasonic lens on the body. A fast-focusing lens on a body to match is the way to go. Now you have me coveting a 1D series, and that is unhealthy for the pocketbook! However....life is short.


Jim

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
803 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 56
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
Mar 30, 2010 16:13 |  #13

Thanks again folks.I do own the 40D which I'm mostly happy with for sports but thought If the 5dMK2 is going to perform at least as good for indoor sports then it would be a good choice because I'm hankering for a FF camera.
Paul


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lefturn99
Senior Member
Avatar
820 posts
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma USA
     
Mar 30, 2010 16:31 |  #14

I've got a 40D and a 5D2. If all I shot was sports I wouldn't consider the 5D2. It's a wonderful camera and has changed my life. But it's really not a sports camera.

I did shoot 3500 frames at an indoor barrel race last weekend. I struggled a bit but I got many wonderful shots at 4000 and 5000 ISO. I was not the main shooter, so no pressure. I missed some because of the slow fps and a few more due to AF (probably as much my inexperience as camera). If I did it all the time I would save my spare change for a 1D4.

If you shoot outdoors in daylight the 7D would rock.


6D, 5D Mk III, 60D, EOS M, Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Mar 30, 2010 16:38 |  #15

DC Fan wrote in post #9896149 (external link)
An accomplished professional motorsports photographer has posted two collections of action images taken with both the 5D Mk. II and the 40D. From the look of those real-world images, either camera can handle the job.

And I'll take John's opinions to the bank any day...


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

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

6,322 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 5DMK2 autofocus better than 40D for sports?
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 dsk26894
806 guests, 341 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.