What to buy first
Shawnhutch
Registered Users Posts: 6 Beginner grinner
OK I am in kinda of a mixed-up state of mind. I am semi-pro photogapgher and have made enough money that I can afford to upgrade a couple items from my camera bag. I just can not decide if I should upgrade from my Canon Rebel XTI to a 40D or if I should go ahead and get the super nice L-Series 70-200 2.8 IS lens, using a 75-300 4-5.6 at the moment. If things go well I should be able to get them both before the end of the year, but I would like to grab one or the other pretty quick. I do mostly sports photography so I am thinking the 2.8 IS lens would ber my best bet. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.
In Christ,
Shawnhutch
In Christ,
Shawnhutch
0
Comments
Shawnhutch, welcome to the Digital Grin.
Yes, the better lens is the more appropriate purchase for an immediate improvement in image quality and number of "keepers". Yes, the Canon EF 70-200mm, f2.8L IS USM is an excellent sports lens.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
After using it for almost 2 year, I have mix feeling of the lens. I hate the weight and size as it hurts my arms. But I love the feel and the IQ. It does everything I want.
I donot do much sport photo, but it works for my 5D perfectly for portrait.
flickr.com/photos/photoskipper/
Sports and the Rebel XTi = missed shots.
I would suggest you get the Canon 40D $940 and then get the NON- is version of the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L lens, about $1,200.00. The IS is great, but it won't make much difference in sports when the action is fast. Actually to be even more frugal, I would even consider a refurbished Canon 30D which is about $640 or a refurbished 40D which is about $875. (I’m referencing Adorama.com)
http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Sounds/Canon-EOS-XTi-XSi-40D-Burst.mp3
dak.smugmug.com
Any camera can do sports, the issue is catching that split second moment. 3 frames per second,vs 6.5 means that the person with the rebel has 3.5x more chances to miss the shot.
I was in a similar position.
I started last year with an XT and 70-200 4.0 non IS...
Though this lens was good for the collegiate level sports realm 2.8 was calling.
I kept the XT and got the 70-200 2.8IS. This lens turned out to be just as amazing as everyone says. I love it and it worked out sooo well for me for sports stuff. Though some people say that you will miss shots i found that most of my shots were in focus most of the time with the XT/70-2002.8LIS combination.
The girl sitting next to me at most games had the XTI and 70-200 from sigma she also got most of the shots that I got.
I let the camera bug get to me in the spring and I started looking for a 30D/40D/20D type camera to replace my XT with. I found a 30D for a really good price. and the upgrade was complete.
With the 30D there are a couple things that have changed about my photography. First the difference between 2 frames is so little i find that i delete way more photos. 3FPS is not that bad when it comes to sports. Though the professionals do occasionally Spray and Pray to make sure they get one. If you can control the XTi Ultimately it will bring you to be a better sports photographer. It has little to do with equipment beyond basic focusing stuff.
The girl I mentioned that used the XTi recently upgraded to the Canon 70-200 2.8LIS as well as the 40D and she says that she feels it is way more responsive of a lens than 3rd party. That is a good way to talk about that lens. It is very jumpy to new targets. It will aquire focus fast. You'll like it on whatever camera you get.
There aren't that many situations in sports where 5FPS is helpful to me though. I took 30D and 70-200 to a volleyball tournement and I found that the First frame of my 3- 5 shots was the one i wanted. and the consequent ones weren't what my mind has trained itself to get b/c i learned how to wait.
Save yourself some Gigabytes and shoot the pics you want don't just hope to get ones... so learn on the XTi and then the 40D later... (prices always go down) Say you accidentily wait and some kind of successor came out driving down the 40D but being only incremental so you still want the 40D ... that is a great situation. Most people agree besides a new version of IS the 70-200 isn't going to be changing any time soon.
/end long post
http://stridephoto.carbonmade.com
Thanks again
Shawn Hutchinson
Partly true but not the whole story. In sports and other rapid action settings (some "event" situations can get pretty active too) there are times when you can plan for the shot and times when you can't plan, stuff just happens.
When stuff just happens you have to react and then the "responsiveness" of the camera in your hand comes into play. If the camera is more responsive you have a better chance of getting the shot.
I have the:
Canon XT/350D
Canon 40D
Canon 1D MKII
... bodies, and by far the 1D MKII is the most responsive. It's not just the frame rate, it's how fast the camera can accurately expose, focus and fire. The "frame rate" more affects how quickly the camera is ready for the "next" shot, but the faster the frame rate (generally) the better the responsiveness.
It's more obvious once you start using multiple camera types the advantages that faster responsiveness allows and offers.
Anyway, to sum up and summarize, it is the better responsiveness that faster frame rate cameras allow that makes more difference to me, not the faster frame rate in and of itself.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
http://joves.smugmug.com/