Worthwhile upgrade from 40D for lo light action?

[jezza8]

I photographed a school fashion show last year, and have been asked back again this year. I used my Canon 40d with 70-200 f2.8 zoom last year and got excellent results especially considering the poor lighting and constantly moving models. However it would be nice to be able to use higher ISO (I used 1600 on the 40d as the realistic maximum) to give me higher shutter speed and smaller aperture for slightly greater DOF. The 40d AF did well given the difficult subjects and wasn't a major problem, but improved performance would be useful. I have 2 x 40d and am not really considering upgrading for the moment, but am considering hiring another body for the event, using one of my 40ds as a backup.

The obvious choice would seem to be the 1dmk3, although I am a little concerned by the extra weight as I am shooting for about 4 hrs non stop and my back was agony last time at the end of the evening. I can live with the 1.4 crop. Alternatives are the 7d or 5dmk2. I guess the 5d will have the lowest noise, but the full frame is a disadvantage as ideally I would like the full reach of the 200mm lens on a 1.6 crop body (I do have a 1.4x converter but then will be losing a stop of light again). Also is the AF of the 5d as good as the 40d? the 7d would seem to be a good compromise, but then for just 1 stop of extra ISO speed over the 40d is it really worthwhile?

I would welcome peoples thoughts/experience.

 

[tdodd]

It sounds to me like you have things mostly worked out and it really comes down to how much you are willing to spend. A couple of things to note though....

- The 5D2 has pretty decent AF performance with the centre AF point, but many claim that the outer points are very poor, so if you need to rely on them I would caution you against the 5D2.

- Furthermore, the 5D2's improve noise performance comes from the larger sensor, which is able to capture more light without saturating. However, if you are going to be cropping because you really want a 320mm equivalent FOV then you will throw away that noise advantage. Strike 2 for the 5D2.

- Now, the 1D3 will surely have the AF performance to satisfy you, but again there is that question mark over noise performance if you are going to end up cropping. There is no doubt it will be good, but good enough to justify the expense? I'm not sure.

- Finally there is the 7D. It will have the AF performance for sure, and the frame rate if you want that. As for noise, at ISOs above 1600 it should pull away from the 40D. Of course, you will have significantly larger files to download/store/process, so that might be a negative.

With all that taken into consideration I'm not sure there is one clear winner, especially if you are talking about spending well over £1,000. I can say that I've obtained very agreeable results from my 50D at 1600 ISO, and even 3200 ISO, at a push, but I think the 40D can do OK too.

I know outdoor shots may not be directly comparable, but here are shots at 3200 ISO from my 40D, 50D and 1D3. When you crop to the same composition, and process to equal sizes, I don't think there is much in it at all. These were shot raw and processed in Lightroom with no edits other than to crop the 1D3 file to roughly match the FOV of the other cameras. The EXIF is in the files but I won't spoil your fun up front by saying which is which.

I do own a 1D3 and 5D2 as well but did not have them at the time I shot the comparison shots above. If you can fill the frame with the 1D3 then I would say that would be the winner, but if you have to crop it levels the playing field more. A tough call to make.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

shoot wide open, and maybe try 85/1.8? I know these lenses are excellent wide open. If AF is a problem then just get rid of one 40D and get something better, as you will come back to the same issue over and over again.

 

[tdodd]

shoot wide open, and maybe try 85/1.8? I know these lenses are excellent wide open. If AF is a problem then just get rid of one 40D and get something better, as you will come back to the same issue over and over again.

If he needs 200mm on a crop body I'm not sure how an 85mm lens helps. Sure an extra stop might be nice, but at less than half the focal length it would turn a 10MP camera into something under 2.5 useful MP, requiring huge cropping, which would negate the noise advantage and create other limitations.

I suspect a 200/1.8 or 200/2 might make more sense, but as a purchase they would be £££££££. If push comes to shove the most cost effective solution would probably be to push the ISO to 3200 and invest in some good NR software - or use a flash .

 

[jezza8]

Hey Tim thanks for the comparison shots. As you say there isn't a huge difference and I can barely see anything on the screen. I guess the shots I am taking are very critical as there are large dark areas in the stage background plus I often need to use levels to increase shadow detail due to the high contrast lighting so this again increases noise. Even using Noise Ninja I am pushing the boundaries. I am considering hiring for this event but really need the zoom flexibility of the 70-200 2.8 so don't think there is a better lens option.

What ISO is the 1dmk3 usable up to? Given there is only a small difference between its 1.4x crop against the 40d 1.6x would I not still gain out overall? If not the 7d looks like the only worthwhile option, and it has the benefit of being lighter.

 

[tdodd]

The 1D3 has a crop factor of 1.3, not 1.4. I've only used my 1D3 at a max of 3200 ISO but the results there are very good. Here is an example, shot raw and processed in Lightroom with no edits except white balance. I've included a 100% crop as well.

1D3 files are very clean and easy to process, even at high ISOs. The "weakness" is the relatively low resolution. However, with something like a 7D, while it is easy to take advantage of the high resolution at low ISOs, at high ISOs you need to downsize in order to merge pixels and make the noise less obvious. In other words there is no advantage to the resolution, just more, noisier data to process. If the weight of a 1D3 would be a problem then would it be practical to use a monopod or tripod?

I don't have anything at 3200 from my 7D, but here is an example at 6400 ISO. This was also shot raw and processed in Lightroom but has been fiddled with, including pulling down the exposure by 1/3, applying a mask to the sharpening, and adding some luminance NR and increasing chroma NR....

Of course, a 100% crop from a 7D is asking a lot, especially at 6400 ISO. Here is a 50% crop....

I guess you could shoot a 7D in mraw but personally I have never tried shooting in anything except full raw. You could have a look here - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=762492 - for a discussion on the pros and cons.

The key to controlling noise is, without a doubt, shooting raw and exposing to the right as far as you can, even pushing a little into recoverable clipping. If you shoot JPEG then you have to be conservative with your exposures, because once something is blown it's game over. With raw you can push the file harder and then pull back in post. Whatever you do, do not shoot with HTP enabled. That is a disaster in the making. On cameras from the 50D and onwards, also disable ALO. It is enabled by default. For those who know what they are doing it is a stupid function. For those who don't, it is hardly better.

 

[jezza8]

Hmm, just realised I can hire a 1Dmk4 for virtually the same price as a 1Dmk3, I guess if I can manage with the weight this has got to be the clear winner.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Hmm, just realised I can hire a 1Dmk4 for virtually the same price as a 1Dmk3, I guess if I can manage with the weight this has got to be the clear winner.

Use monopod?

 

[jezza8]

Yes, I have thought about that, I might give it a go. I need to move about quite a bit during the evening and the hall is pretty crowded so my only concern is if it will be more of a hinderance than a help.

 

[OSB]

Yes, I have thought about that, I might give it a go. I need to move about quite a bit during the evening and the hall is pretty crowded so my only concern is if it will be more of a hinderance than a help.

Probably, unless you're really used to using one on the move!

 

[jezza8]

I thought I would update you on what I did in the end and how it worked out:

I hired a 1D MKIV and used it on a monopod with my 70-200 f2.8 IS L, both with and without a 1.4x converter. The combination was stunning, I couldn't have managed without that camera (low light and autofocus) or the monopod (weight of camera/lens for 3 1/2 hrs!)

As expected the 1D MKIV delivered the goods, a number of the 33 sets were in complete shadow so I made full use of the 12800 ISO setting, which does have some noticeable noise but is very usable. Also autofocus was pretty much spot on for all of the 3,000 shots I took, including the ones in near darkness, and the 16MP resolution allowed flexibility for plenty of cropping. I had to shoot in JPG due to the high volume of shots, I dialled in some -ve exposure compensation, but it appears that when using the automatic ISO function (which allows automatic selection of ISO within a user selected subset of the full range) that exposure compensation does not function, which is my only criticism.

The monopod worked well and was easy to use on the night, I have the Manfrotto Neotec monopod which you can raise and lower with just one hand while shooting, the only monopod I know you can do this with. And the 70-200 f2.8 needs no introduction from me, it was superb as always.

You can see some samples on my site at http://www.photoviva.co.uk/group8174.html and there is a link from the home page to all of the shots.

The only problem with all of this is I have had to send the 1D MKIV back and return to my 40D! Time for an upgrade soon I think!

 

[tdodd]

12,800 ISO? What were they using for lighting, candles, mobile phones? That seems nuts to me. Still, good job you went for the 1D4

 

[jezza8]

12,800 ISO? What were they using for lighting, candles, mobile phones? That seems nuts to me. Still, good job you went for the 1D4

Yes, you are right it is rather nuts. The lighting was done by the students so all credit to them that they managed a professional looking show, but for some reason in the group dance sets they generally went for very dim red lighting, and most of those on stage were not even covered by this light.... I did ask the organisers a few times if they could put more light on the stage but that is what we ended up with.

I was mighty pleased to have the 1DMKIV.

 

[seriousrikk]

Yes, you are right it is rather nuts. The lighting was done by the students so all credit to them that they managed a professional looking show, but for some reason in the group dance sets they generally went for very dim red lighting, and most of those on stage were not even covered by this light.... I did ask the organisers a few times if they could put more light on the stage but that is what we ended up with.

I was mighty pleased to have the 1DMKIV.

Do you have the chance to talk to the studens doing the lighting before?

I'm sure fasion shows lighting is normally designed in some way around filming and photography. See if you can get involved from the photographer angle and improve the lighting for the night.

 

[woof woof]

Shows over, results are linked and can be viewed.

Well Done