Equipment Planning - Second Body

GadgetRick

Getting to that time where I plan equipment purchases so I can budget for them. So looking for advice on one of the purchases I'm planning.

I currently shoot with a 50D. Love it. Planning on keeping that to do the non-sports stuff I shoot. Mostly do MMA photography but have been doing more and more, "traditional," photography (portraits, events, etc). I'm looking to get a 2nd body for all of the obvious reasons. Here's what I'm thinking:

-1D--thinking about this for the sports aspect as I understand they're one of the best. My concern is cropping as I must crop fairly heavily in most MMA shows I shoot. What about the 1Ds for the full frame capabilities? Would that get me better low-light capabilities?
-7D--I've shot with my friend's and the AF pretty awesome for sports. It's also a little better at higher ISOs than the 50D so I'd get myself a little more there.

Both will give me faster fps which will be useful. Just wondering which might be the right thing to do. If I go with the 1D I have to buy used as I cannot (yet) justify the price of a new 1D. I can, however, justify the cost of a new 7D.

The only thing I wish I had (at the moment) is faster fps and better low-light capabilities. I find the AF on the 50D to be good. I wouldn't mind better AF though.

Anyway, looking for suggestions.

GadgetRick

Buehler....Buehler...

ziggy53

If "MMA" means "Mixed Martial Arts/Ultimate Fighting Championship" events then I think low-light, high ISO image performance "and" low-light AF performance should be paramount.

The Canon 7D is the best of the Canon crop 1.6x cameras, but it cannot match the 1D/1Ds series bodies for AF performance in low-light. A 1D MKII works well to ISO 1600, but ISO 3200 is not a calibrated ISO and dynamic range suffers, as does random sensor noise. The 1D MKIII is an improvement, but some photographers still complain about the AF getting confused in strongly backlit situations, which you would encounter in some shooting angles in an arena setting.

The Canon 1D MKIV is the Canon body you would enjoy best. The AF speed and accuracy are very, very nice, even in difficult lighting. High ISO is also very good regarding random sensor noise.

If you don't already have a lot of glass, also consider the Nikon D3 and even the D700. Both have very competent AF sections for low-light. Those who have both consistently mention that the D3 is faster to AF in low light specifically. Their noise footprint at high-ISO is extremely nice too, although at the higher ISOs, and normalized for print size, the Canon 1D MKIV is very close to the D3 and D700.

Strong crops from any camera are not advised unless this is for newspaper publication, where the resolution requirements are much less. For conventional prints nothing beats using the right lenses and composing in the camera, tight to the subjects and tight to the action. This can require multiple bodies and multiple lenses to cover the action efficiently.

GadgetRick

Thanks Ziggy.

So it looks like the 7D is a great camera as I've experienced but the 1D Mk IV is better for this sort of thing (yes, that's mixed martial arts). Can it do well at higher ISOs like the 7D? I have shows with good lighting and use 1000 ISO then I have shows like the other night where I was at 2000 ISO and should have been at 2500 but I wasn't comfortable pushing my 50D to that level.

I have some L glass so I'd rather not switch if I don't have to. That plus the cost of Nikon glass seems much higher (speaking equivalent focal lengths/apertures).

No matter what, with MMA, there's a lot of cropping going on. Next to impossible NOT to crop because of the way the action happens.

Now, the big question is the 1D Mk IV $2500 better? If it is, then I'll have to work harder to get it.

ziggy53

No camera will give you a 100% keeper rate, but the 1D MKIV will deliver more keepers per event. The increased AF accuracy and speed will account for most of the visible improvement. The high-ISO noise signature difference is significant as well. For example, see the samples at:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Here is a screen grab of the 7D at ISO 6400 (left) vs the 1D MKIV at ISO 6400 (right). The extra detail translates directly into a more cropable image.

GadgetRick

ziggy53 wrote: »

No camera will give you a 100% keeper rate, but the 1D MKIV will deliver more keepers per event. The increased AF accuracy and speed will account for most of the visible improvement. The high-ISO noise signature difference is significant as well. For example, see the samples at:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Here is a screen grab of the 7D at ISO 6400 (left) vs the 1D MKIV at ISO 6400 (right). The extra detail translates directly into a more cropable image.

Wow! Ok, maybe it is $2500 better.

Now, how to scrape up the money for it is the bigger problem...

I may have to go with a 7D (first) then, when I can do it, sell the 50D and get the 1D MkIV, then I'd have the 1D with the 7D as a 2nd. Not a horrible setup...

ziggy53

GadgetRick wrote: »

... I may have to go with a 7D (first) then, when I can do it, sell the 50D and get the 1D MkIV, then I'd have the 1D with the 7D as a 2nd. Not a horrible setup...

That sounds like a pretty good plan. You could always rent a 1D MKIV for any important matches.

GadgetRick

ziggy53 wrote: »

That sounds like a pretty good plan. You could always rent a 1D MKIV for any important matches.

Actually would do that before I dropped $5k on one anyway.