Cost effective options for remote camera (EF mount)

A

A_S

Messages
576
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, I've tried to use my old 7D as a remote camera for motorsports, in the forests.

I planned to use it with my old 10-22 EF-S which is still a brilliant lens. However its just a bit too wide to be of much use.

So I am wondering if anyone has any suggestions for a cheepish lens I can buy second hand for this purpose? I've used my 24-105 F4 and that seems around the range i need, however its still a work horse of a lens for me, and i often shoot is as my main lens, so I don't want it stuck on the remote camera and i don't want it damaged (as the remote camera will be low down close to the road)

Of course I could buy a second copy, second hand, but having experienced the aperture flex cable issue I am reticent to buy the mk1 second hand, and I think the mk2 second hand is still over £700...! a bit much to spend on a lens for the remote camera - even if I utilised the new one as the main lens and the old one on the remote camera...

So I am wondering if there are any other EF-S or non L lenses that might serve the purpose - quick focusing, good range etc?

I am thinking the EF 24-105 non L or possibly the 18-135 but i need to know they will nail the sort of shots I am after - i.e focus quickly and accuratly compared to my L lenses
 
Last edited:
It depends on how much focal length you need.

I rarely go above 40mm on remotes so use both a Canon 17-40mm and the brilliantly valued Sigma 15-30mm (if you can still find one).
 
PS, regarding this:

A_S said:
...i need to know they will nail the sort of shots I am after - i.e focus quickly and accuratly compared to my L lenses
Click to expand...

The most effective use of remotes is in MF mode, not AF.
 
Thanks - that may be the case but that doesn't really help with finding a solution to the original question!

edit: I didn't see the first reply - thanks - again, for my purposes i need something more than 40mm as stated the 10-22 which is 16-35 full frame equivelent isn't quite enough. so the 40 at around 60mm and 30 at around 45 or so on crop doesn't add enough reach.
 
Last edited:
A_S said:
Thanks - that may be the case but that doesn't really help with finding a solution to the original question!
Click to expand...


Taking away the requirement for faster acurate autofocus (because not needed) will give you a wider range of options.. Looked like helpful advice for finding the right lens to me :)
 
has anyone else got any thoughts? 55-200 maybe?
 
KIPAX said:
Taking away the requirement for faster acurate autofocus (because not needed) will give you a wider range of options.. Looked like helpful advice for finding the right lens to me :)
Click to expand...

The frustrating thing about this thread is that you are both answering a question that was not asked

I did not ask for an opinion on what the best focus method was for a remote camera - or any advice on that front - I set out what I needed and the circumstances around what it must do.

The fact that you didn’t even consider that there may be a reason I need it to auto focus says a lot - ‘my way or the high way’

Why is it so hard for people to be open minded, helpful and on topic?

I probably wouldn’t have posted this but seeing you both ‘ganged up’ on another poster and railroaded another thread (in fact I agreed with the choice but the manor in which it was conveyed was rather rude) maybe trying to be a bit more polite ans helpful next time eh?
 
Last edited:
What about a new Sigma or Tamron 17-50ish 2.8? both good quality, and fairly cheap compared to a 24-70.
 
A_S said:
The frustrating thing about this thread is that you are both answering a question that was not asked

I did not ask for an opinion on what the best focus method was for a remote camera - or any advice on that front - I set out what I needed and the circumstances around what it must do.

The fact that you didn’t even consider that there may be a reason I need it to auto focus says a lot - ‘my way or the high way’

Why is it so hard for people to be open minded, helpful and on topic?

I probably wouldn’t have posted this but seeing you both ‘ganged up’ on another poster and railroaded another thread (in fact I agreed with the choice but the manor in which it was conveyed was rather rude) maybe trying to be a bit more polite ans helpful next time eh?
Click to expand...

I offered some advice based on over twelve years of using remote cameras in sport.

A one liner is hardly being over the top - just mentioning what I've found in the past.

Doing what you want is going to prove tough given that there is probably no fixed entry point in to the frame and having a long focal length makes it even harder as the
focal plane/DoF will be hughly reduced.

It's going to be hard but if you nail it, it'll be very satisfying.

As for lenses, given that you are using a crop, I'd possibly look at the fairly old 17-85mm as you've ruled the 24-104 Mk 1 out (although that is one of my favourite lenses).

FYI - don't shout at us too loudly because you are asking a motorsport question in the sports forum (as opposed to the motorsports' one where you might find someone with similar experience).
 
PS - I know that it's against what you want but there is a 24-104 for sale in the classifieds for £225.

At that price, I'd grab it with both hands.
 
toohuge said:
Must it be a zoom lens? The Canon 85 1.8 has lightning fast af, is very affordable used, and is nice and light so easy to balance on a tripod etc.

Also, the 70-200 f4L (non usm) is spectacular value for money used and could suit your application perfectly
Click to expand...

Thanks - already have one of these (70-200) and it has served me well since 2005! I've just bought a 3rd party tripod color for it to see if that will solve my problems, however i am still a bit nervous about risking any damage to it, as i do still use it as a backup for my 100-500 and at 70mm min (around 110mm on 1.6x crop) it leaves me with nothing between 20mm and 70mm, unless I take my 50mm 1.4 with me.

Prime is an option,but, flexability is key.
 
DemiLion said:
I offered some advice based on over twelve years of using remote cameras in sport.

A one liner is hardly being over the top - just mentioning what I've found in the past.

Doing what you want is going to prove tough given that there is probably no fixed entry point in to the frame and having a long focal length makes it even harder as the
focal plane/DoF will be hughly reduced.

It's going to be hard but if you nail it, it'll be very satisfying.

As for lenses, given that you are using a crop, I'd possibly look at the fairly old 17-85mm as you've ruled the 24-104 Mk 1 out (although that is one of my favourite lenses).

FYI - don't shout at us too loudly because you are asking a motorsport question in the sports forum (as opposed to the motorsports' one where you might find someone with similar experience).
Click to expand...

Thanks - thought sport was more encompacing and would garner a wider range of options hence the post in here.

It maybe a 24-105 is the best option but it seems a bit counter intuitive to carry 2 and on mine I've had the aperture flex cable issue and I'm not keen on buying a second hand for X amount then having to spend Y amount to fix it if that one goes wrong (its a common problem).

There will be no fixed entry point into the frame, a manual focus option wouldn't get around that - it would mean an all or nothing approach. Not wanting to go overly off topic again but the reason I want it to auto focus is that often I can't see the remote camera, its over a crest or in a different position/different corner/different direction to where my main camera is shooting so when I trigger the remote shutter I can't garrentee I'll get the subject at the correct point in the frame.

Manual is useful if I just fire off a massive burst but often when i start that burst the subject may have already passed that point in the frame - that may be a learning thing and there may be better ways of doing it but I'll find that out in time by testing, experimenting and pondering then trying again....

Also, even if I could predict the time to start shooting, if the entry point is different I get nothing, if its as predicted I get something. Some cars have a wide entry to a corner and some have a tight entry so setting a specific area you are imediatly limiting yourself to a specific shot - at least this way If i set the AF area up on a given 3rd of the frame that has 80% chance of my intended focus point (car reg for example) I get 80% of something - for example on the first shot below, although in that case I was limited by having to use the 10-20mm lens.

IMG_6796.jpgIMG_6726.jpgIMG_4655.jpgIMG_5021.jpgIMG_5110.jpg

You can see some examples of the same camera, different subject locations and different plains of focus which I don't think i could have acheived by manual focusing (unless using something so wide it didn't matter)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top