What (Canon)body to you shoot with?

Chipper

Chipper

Messages
3,074
Name
Linda
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys... Just wondering what body most of you that are Canon users shoot with? Pondering another body for sports particularly.... Thanks for your help, hopefully!
 
7d mk2 had this since the photo show so far so good a big step up from my 550d but worth it for wildlife and bif. I have used it on the odd low light shot and it seems to do very well
 
1dx but if you cant stretch to it then 1dmkIV and if you cant stretch to that then what you on about? :)
 
2 used mark IV which are bloody good. But not as bloody good as the 1dX, but my wages aren't bloody good!! You can pick 1d mk3 for not a lot of money at all now, although the low light performance isn't as good as the IV and when cropping heavily it shows its age a little bit. Only my opinion and there's others on here far more qualified than me.
 
If I wasnt shooting indoor or poorly lit venues i would be well happy with the mkIV.. I upgraded to 1dx purely for the low light performance and worth every penny :)
 
Went from a 1D MkIII to a 1D MkIV. Was very happy with the performance, so managed to secure a second MkIV.
Would love to have a 1DX for games that I shoot under poor floodlight (non league).
 
1dmouse said:
I bought a 1D MK IV and it was the best thing I ever did. I do find anything over ISO 2000 and shooting at 1000sec in dark grey conditions (local football with no floodlights) is at it its limit for me..
Click to expand...

wow.... iso 6400 no problem wiht the 1dmkIV regularly published.. even got some at iso 12800 in extreme bad conditions... iso 6400 1/3 over expose and fill the frame.. highly usable
 
KIPAX said:
wow.... iso 6400 no problem wiht the 1dmkIV regularly published.. even got some at iso 12800 in extreme bad conditions... iso 6400 1/3 over expose and fill the frame.. highly usable
Click to expand...

I am sure you are right Kipax for being published and print. Something I don't do, I post my pictures on my local club website etc and I only have a EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L lens which limits me on very dark grey days. On the plus side my team are due to move a new ground and will have good quality floodlights. I'll have to put 50p in the meter when it is too dark for me:)
 
Deffo would have a good used 1DIV before a 5DIII. Not enough fps on 5D
 
I have Canon FTBn, AE-1 and an A-1 and when I was getting some 'Sport Photography' for local newspapers I bought a 300mm f2.8 Tokina AT-X FD fit lens and then all the work dried up so don't use it much now ( luckily it was 'Tax Deductible' over several years -- !! )
300 Tokina by pentaxpete, on Flickr
 
70D and 5D3 here. I'm happy with those but have never tried a 1#
 
7D, 7D2 and 5D2. Love the 7D2 under all lighting conditions.
All the top footy togs I see are using one or more 1DX bodies nowadays but, interestingly, I see lots of older Nikon bodies still used especially the D3S.
 
1D Mark III. Don't believe all of the 'it can't focus' comments!
 
all you full framers out there.. went from a 1000D to a 550D to a 60D. cant see me upgrading for quite a long time now as dont think theres a huge improvement thats going to make much of a difference in the crop sensor canon range , and as half my lenses are crop sensor only see no point going up to FF
 
snapzz said:
Update :)

2x 1dmk4 + 1x 1Dx :banana:
Click to expand...


How you finding the 1dx.. godsend for indoor sport... personally I dont find the AF any better than the mk4 .. probably me just cant tell the difference.. but the iso capabilities made it worth every penny to upgrade for me.... the lack of reach on FF is offset by the extra pixels so a cropped 1dx to the mk4 equivelant is as good if not better IMHO
 
KIPAX said:
the lack of reach on FF is offset by the extra pixels so a cropped 1dx to the mk4 equivelant is as good if not better IMHO
Click to expand...

Do you find that the focussing is any less accurate? I use a 1D Mark III at the moment, coupled with a 100-400 F4.5-5.6L lens. Not an ideal match perhaps, but for my sons rugby games I need the range, rather than a fixed 400mm. I wondered if a full frame camera would be less accurate to focus, as the object to focus on would be slight smaller - if that makes sense!
 
wakarimasen said:
Do you find that the focussing is any less accurate? I use a 1D Mark III at the moment, coupled with a 100-400 F4.5-5.6L lens. Not an ideal match perhaps, but for my sons rugby games I need the range, rather than a fixed 400mm. I wondered if a full frame camera would be less accurate to focus, as the object to focus on would be slight smaller - if that makes sense!
Click to expand...


Its relative.. its only going to be smaller at the furthest point but not so small you cant latch onto it... difference between mkIII and 1dx is absoloutly massive BTW
 
KIPAX said:
... difference between mkIII and 1dx is absoloutly massive BTW
Click to expand...

I guessed so! ;) I've been nursing a dilemma for some time: get rid of my MF Nikons and consolidate with Canon or sell my Canon stuff and move to Nikon. The former would involve primes and setting up a 1V for manual focussing, whereas the latter means the purchase of a D3S and the new 80-400 AFS lens. So far I just can't make up my mind.
 
KIPAX said:
How you finding the 1dx.. godsend for indoor sport... personally I dont find the AF any better than the mk4 .. probably me just cant tell the difference.. but the iso capabilities made it worth every penny to upgrade for me.... the lack of reach on FF is offset by the extra pixels so a cropped 1dx to the mk4 equivelant is as good if not better IMHO
Click to expand...

Only used it at one event but still really trying to find the best setup as its so different from the mk4. Certainly losing out with the FF at longest reach but gaining closer up. Only shooting at 1600 ISO so not really challenging it yet. Need to get into one of those ice rinks that are caves to fully test it :)
 
pentaxpete said:
I have Canon FTBn, AE-1 and an A-1 and when I was getting some 'Sport Photography' for local newspapers I bought a 300mm f2.8 Tokina AT-X FD fit lens and then all the work dried up so don't use it much now ( luckily it was 'Tax Deductible' over several years -- !! )
300 Tokina by pentaxpete, on Flickr
Click to expand...

The A-1 is still my favourite FD camera, and I think I have acquired most of the FD bodies over the years. I reckon it gets more use than my 5D Mk 1 since I switched to a Sony A7 for my digital needs (and get to carry on using my FD lenses).

I've always rather fancied a Tokina 300/2.8. Seems to be a cracking lens by all accounts - I make do with a Canon FD 300/4 when I need the reach.

Edit: just noticed this is sports :)
 
Last edited:
Currently using two 1DMKiii. They have served me well and still good enough to get stuff in nationals on a regular basis.

However, one of them has about had it. Does anyone here have any experience with the 7dmk2? Would be interested to hear feedback about focusing and low light compared to the 1DMKiii
 
Been using one for the past six months and love it. Never used a 1dMk3 so difficult to say how they compare. I like the auto focus and the options/settings seem very similar to those of the 1DX and 5D3. I had a pic of mine blown up to 4-5feet wide at the Birmingham photo show a few months back and the guys on the Canon stand couldn't say which body I'd used (or lens for that matter) so I wouldn't worry too much about the crop sensor. Try one out and see what you think.
 
Just as an update, I had reason to swop back to my 1Dmk4 at an indoor event and hated the bloody thing, couldnt wait to get back to the 1Dx!
 
Really am torn between a 7DMK2 and a second hand 1DMKIV - useless at buying things :(
 
snapzz said:
Just as an update, I had reason to swop back to my 1Dmk4 at an indoor event and hated the bloody thing, couldnt wait to get back to the 1Dx!
Click to expand...
I'll give it a good home for free Graham if you don't want it. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top