A good Canon body for sports

D

driver_wedge

Messages
401
Name
Shane
Edit My Images
Yes
I have only been keen on photography for about a year and currently use a Canon 500D for, amongst other things, sports such as football and golf. I initially purchased a 55-250 IS lens which was great but decided to upgrade to a 70-200 2.8L IS for it's highly acclaimed all-round capabilities. I'm very happy with the lens and have been able to shoot some lovely shots of my kids, etc. The few times I have used it thus far for football and golf, I have stuggled to get images as sharp as some of those posted in the sports C&C section - even with sharpening in PS - albeit, the football was shot in the evening so ISO had to be bumped up a bit and some shot look a bit too grainy for my liking.

Anyway, I was reading last night that the 500D is a poor performer for sports situations as the AF isn't always quick enough to keep up with moving subjects (in AI Servo mode) and the continuous shoot mode is too slow to be ideal.

As a result I am beginning to doubt whether my camera can produce the sort of shots I expect from the lens. I appreciate that the lens is a bit limited in terms of reach so I tend to take most of my shot when the action is close.

I'm still very low down in the photography learning curve, but would an upgrade in camera be something that would be recommended specifically for sports shoots? If so, which one and why? I have looked at a few review and comparison websites and have a fair idea of the benefits that the higher level camera's offer, but would be particularly interested to know what camera our sports enthusiasts use and their general feelings about the kit they use.
 
Canon's 7D is like a junior version of the 1D series. Very capable, good resolution and sits below the very expensive 1D series as a capable all rounder.
 
You don't need a new body. A fancy bit of kit would make the task easier, but still only if you know what you're doing. Believe it or not, people used to shoot sports without autofocus or motordrives.

If you want to post up some examples of shots you've been struggling with, people will be more than happy to suggest ways of improving. :thumbs:
 
I can't believe a 500D can't shoot sports. I used a 400D for 2 months quite happily (ish - size, features lost in menu/button push land) as a backup when my 40D shutter failed.
 
Jayst84 said:
You don't need a new body. A fancy bit of kit would make the task easier, but still only if you know what you're doing. Believe it or not, people used to shoot sports without autofocus or motordrives.

If you want to post up some examples of shots you've been struggling with, people will be more than happy to suggest ways of improving. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

:plusone:


Byker28i said:
I can't believe a 500D can't shoot sports. I used a 400D for 2 months quite happily (ish - size, features lost in menu/button push land) as a backup when my 40D shutter failed.
Click to expand...

:plusone:

I used my 450D for sports, and I can't say it ever really struggled.

One thing to say though, when I first got my 70-200 and shot some sports with it, I was convinced it was back focussing. I kept with it to do some more tests, and a few matches down the line I was getting shots I was really happy with. They do take some getting used to, just because the dof can get deceivingly thin, and easy for your subject to move out of focus.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of reasons to upgrade from a xxxD series body, but don't buy a new camera and suddenly expect your shots to be instantly better!

Chris
 
I love my 450 for sports and action shots, upgraded now to 7D purely just for the speed but seriously considering switching back to the 450 as more comfy with it.:shrug:
 
Briony said:
I love my 450 for sports and action shots, upgraded now to 7D purely just for the speed but seriously considering switching back to the 450 as more comfy with it.:shrug:
Click to expand...

Strange as I find the 400D really small, especially with big L lenses on it. It just doesn't seem to 'feel' right. Maybe it's the balance. Perfect camera for mounting on a car though :D
 
You may not believe it but Canon EOS-1D series can shoot sport. Mk2 is good, mk3 is better, and mk4 is the hottest depending on your pocket size.
Click to expand...

The 1D series is what I had in my mind. The newer ones do come with a hefty price tag so won't be considering that option just yet. I suppose I should really try one out to see if there's a noticeable difference and therefore worth the extra cost given what I use it for.

Canon's 7D is like a junior version of the 1D series. Very capable, good resolution and sits below the very expensive 1D series as a capable all rounder.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. It's certainly an option I will look at.

You can pick up a secondhad 1DMk II for about £650. You will not be disappointed.
Click to expand...

I certainly will consider that option - thank you!

I can't believe a 500D can't shoot sports. I used a 400D for 2 months quite happily
Click to expand...

I read it here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T1i-500D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx

This is the extract:
"Obviously, this frame rate is comparatively slow, but perfectly adequate for most non-action scenarios.

Like all Canon EOS DSLR bodies, the Canon EOS Rebel T1i / 500D has an AI Servo AF mode that predicts where the subject will be the moment the shutter opens. The big test of an autofocus system is how well it tracks action - more specifically, action that is rapidly approaching or receding at a relatively close distance - such as a near-tightly-framed person running.

Aside from having a relatively long shutter lag (which is very fast compared to most point and shoot models), the T1i's XSi-like 9-point wide-area AF system is not Canon's best sports/action AF system.

My results from a youth soccer match shot with the T1i were not encouraging. A very high percent of the images of players running toward the camera because they were OOF (Out of Focus) - with focus always trailing the athlete. The Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens I was using is easily up to this task, but the Rebel AF system, even using the f/2.8 cross-type center point-only, did not perform so well. If you are shooting sports with a T1i, shooting stills and action that remains a constant distance from the camera will give you the highest keeper rate. Better yet, step up to one of the higher Canon EOS model lines."
 
I used the 350D for sport when I started out...it did me fine until I wanted to get a second body...the 30D. It stayed as my second body until September 2008...and that was with Rugby World Cups and Premier League football in between.
 
driver_wedge said:
The 1D series is what I had in my mind. The newer ones do come with a hefty price tag so won't be considering that option just yet. I suppose I should really try one out to see if there's a noticeable difference and therefore worth the extra cost given what I use it for.
Click to expand...

1Dmk3's go for about 1300-1700 (and up) depending on condition. i picked mine up recently inc 6 months warranty too :)
 
driver_wedge said:
The 1D series is what I had in my mind. The newer ones do come with a hefty price tag so won't be considering that option just yet. I suppose I should really try one out to see if there's a noticeable difference and therefore worth the extra cost given what I use it for.

I read it here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T1i-500D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx

This is the extract:
"Obviously, this frame rate is comparatively slow, but perfectly adequate for most non-action scenarios.

Like all Canon EOS DSLR bodies, the Canon EOS Rebel T1i / 500D has an AI Servo AF mode that predicts where the subject will be the moment the shutter opens. The big test of an autofocus system is how well it tracks action - more specifically, action that is rapidly approaching or receding at a relatively close distance - such as a near-tightly-framed person running.

Aside from having a relatively long shutter lag (which is very fast compared to most point and shoot models), the T1i's XSi-like 9-point wide-area AF system is not Canon's best sports/action AF system.

My results from a youth soccer match shot with the T1i were not encouraging. A very high percent of the images of players running toward the camera because they were OOF (Out of Focus) - with focus always trailing the athlete. The Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens I was using is easily up to this task, but the Rebel AF system, even using the f/2.8 cross-type center point-only, did not perform so well. If you are shooting sports with a T1i, shooting stills and action that remains a constant distance from the camera will give you the highest keeper rate. Better yet, step up to one of the higher Canon EOS model lines."
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'd be wary of using a website (even a well-informed one such as The Digital Picture) to determine your next purchase.

One website telling you "it's not so great" should not be your one reason...get out there, learn the camera and keep shooting with your current body.

What settings are you using? Tell you what, PM me a few shots (with EXIF) or post them to the Sports section and I'll give you some advice...better yet, read my tutorial (See my signature) and see if you're doing all the things in there.

You need to ask yourself if you really need a 1D?

Sure, they're great bodies, but if you're just shooting the kids play football, isn't it just a bit of overkill?

How long have you been shooting the 500D? Have you really learnt everything about it yet? Don't go buying another body if you're frustrated with the shots you get from your current one but havent tried anything different.

That's a lot of money to spend for no real reason.
 
I used my 450D for sports, and I can't say it ever really struggled.

One thing to say though, when I first got my 70-200 and shot some sports with it, I was convinced it was back focussing. I kept with it to do some more tests, and a few matches down the line I was getting shots I was really happy with. They do take some getting used to, just because the dof can get deceivingly thin, and easy for your subject to move out of focus.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of reasons to upgrade from a xxxD series body, but don't buy a new camera and suddenly expect your shots to be instantly better!
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I don't want to buy a new camera as I shelled out nearly £600 for the one I have, so really want the source of the problem to lie with me. That way I know that, with practice, I will get a better return. I'm enjoying the learning curve though..
 
Hmmm, I'd be wary of using a website (even a well-informed one such as The Digital Picture) to determine your next purchase.

One website telling you "it's not so great" should not be your one reason...get out there, learn the camera and keep shooting with your current body.

What settings are you using? Tell you what, PM me a few shots (with EXIF) or post them to the Sports section and I'll give you some advice...better yet, read my tutorial (See my signature) and see if you're doing all the things in there.

You need to ask yourself if you really need a 1D?

Sure, they're great bodies, but if you're just shooting the kids play football, isn't it just a bit of overkill?

How long have you been shooting the 500D? Have you really learnt everything about it yet? Don't go buying another body if you're frustrated with the shots you get from your current one but havent tried anything different.

That's a lot of money to spend for no real reason.
Click to expand...

Thanks James. I appreciate what you've said.

I've been using the body since September last year. I accept that I've got a long way to go before I make the best of it and some shots I take are probably more down to luck than judgement. When I read that article, I simply questioned whether there would be a limit to the level I would reach when using it for football (golf seems to be pretty good, as it happens), particularly if the AF is under question. One thing of note though, is that I've only used my kit for evening football and the light wasn't great.

The more I'm reading this, the more I'm starting to feel happier that the body will serve me well and I simply need to get more experience and to learn to choose the correct settings for the situation.
 
driver_wedge said:
Thanks James. I appreciate what you've said.

I've been using the body since September last year. I accept that I've got a long way to go before I make the best of it and some shots I take are probably more down to luck than judgement. When I read that article, I simply questioned whether there would be a limit to the level I would reach when using it for football (golf seems to be pretty good, as it happens), particularly if the AF is under question. One thing of note though, is that I've only used my kit for evening football and the light wasn't great.

The more I'm reading this, the more I'm starting to feel happier that the body will serve me well and I simply need to get more experience and to learn to choose the correct settings for the situation.
Click to expand...

Not a problem...thats what I (and many others) are here for! :thumbs:

If you do want to put some shots up on the Sports section then we'll be gentle with you, and give you some pointers...everything is much easier with photos!
 
LOL at that website review.

try using a 300D which is what I started with. It has a slight pause from pressing the button to the shutter firing, like 1/10 to 1/5 of a sec, so you had to anticipate.

I still got great shots though.
 
driver_wedge said:
Thanks for that. I don't want to buy a new camera as I shelled out nearly £600 for the one I have, so really want the source of the problem to lie with me. That way I know that, with practice, I will get a better return. I'm enjoying the learning curve though..
Click to expand...

That's good news (that you want it to be your fault, most people much prefer to blame the equipment :D). Remember, the reviewers regularly test 1D Mk IVs and similar, so of course the performance is going to seem a bit pants when compared to an entry-level model!

Practice, practice, practice, it's the only way I'm afraid :)

Chris
 
Practice, practice, practice, it's the only way I'm afraid
Click to expand...

Chris

I wouldn't want it any other way. I work in the professional end of a given sport so appreciate fully that skill is only derived via hard work and determination to succeed - helped along with qualified advice, of course. It's easy to stick with it when you enjoy doing it though.
 
I used a 400D + 70-200 2.8 IS L for quite a while. Not a bad combination for Rugby and the shots I missed were down to me - not the camera.

Obviously if you are looking at upgrading your body you are looking at a 40/50D, 7D or 1D. In that order budget increasing!
 
Mark

Given what yourself and the others have said, I'll stick by the 500D for a while yet as it will give me a sound basis from which I can upgrade later on. Perhaps some of the current premium models will be within my budget by that time - and I may also be able to do the thing some justice. I'd hate to fall into the 'all the gear and no idea' category :D
 
driver_wedge said:
Mark

Given what yourself and the others have said, I'll stick by the 500D for a while yet as it will give me a sound basis from which I can upgrade later on. Perhaps some of the current premium models will be within my budget by that time - and I may also be able to do the thing some justice. I'd hate to fall into the 'all the gear and no idea' category :D
Click to expand...

Fair 'nuff. Get some images up in the Sports section for some good old honest crit and advice!! :)
 
I certainly will when I get some time.

Here's a golf one that I took when I first bought the lens. It actually came out quite dark whereas others on the same AV setting came out very bright and over exposed. It was a bright day and in hinsight I think f2.8 was a bit much.

bigd1.jpg


This used f2.8, 1/2000 sec, IS0 100, pattern metering (not sure why as I usually use evaluative), exp. -0.7, focal 95mm

I find this image acceptable, albeit I had to sharpen and lighten in PS. I'll post some poor ones later when I have a bit of time on my hands so maybe you can point out obvious mistakes and things to avoid in future?

Thanks for all the input folks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top