Thinking about a new body

blackwaterstudio

Wish I had the money for a 1DsMKII, but would have to sell my truck

Anyways, with as much as I've been shooting of the hockey games, I'm thinking about upgrading from my 300D to a 20D.

Whats your take on this? Is it a good camera to shoot sports with? FPS high enough? AI Servo?

Thanks for your imput.

Mongrel

Here's my take on it...
My digital upgrade path has gone like this:

Sony S75
Digital Rebel
20D
1D

I was quite happy with the Digital Rebel even shooting my daughter's field hockey, lacrosse, and basketball games. Nothing great but better than I had ever done with film or the S75. Plenty of out of focus shots for sure, and not having the ability to choose AF modes produced much frustration.

In September I aggreed to shoot a small wedding. I knew I needed a second (backup) body for something like this and bought an Elan 7n (film body). Well, a case of cold feet at the last minute coupled with "new camera fever" and I found myself with a 20D in hand. Without going into the ad-nasauem discussion of the Digital Rebel vs the 20D, let's just say they are not even close as far as function, but pretty close as far as image quality.

This fall I shot a whole bunch of games (outdoor fields) including my nephew's football team with the 20D and a combination of a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM and a Sigma 100-300 f/4.0 EX HSM. WOW-what a difference. Can you say night and day? The Digital Rebel and the 20D aren't even close for this type of shooting.

However...

I realized a few things like:

Why the 'pros' use 8fps cameras
The AF on the 20D was good but not great

See, in between the good shots I was getting were too many oof shots and in some situations there were 'gaps' in the action (especially when shooting field hockey goals and the like).

I started asking about this on some of the 'other' forums and received some advice from photogs like Nill Toulme (sp?), who is a very good sports shooter indeed. After explaining my situation Nill felt, and I agreed, that it would be best to let go of the D-Rebel and search out a good condition 1D. Nill's photography and experience with the 1D convinced me that for shooting sports the 1D was just what I needed at a price point I could afford (well, honestly, I can't really afford it but I digress...).

Since you have the Digital Rebel already, and it really is quite capable of shooting everything from landscapes to portraits to candids etc. I would recommend that you consider a used 1D to use as a dedicated 'sports' body.

Then, eventually move from the Rebel to a 20D (new or used). To my way of thinking the combination of the 1D and the 20D makes a really great kit at a very hard to beat price.

Good condition used 1D's are popping up from $1500 to $1800 usually with some accessories like an extra battery or something. I have only had my 1D for a day and a half, but let me tell you-it's really one heck of a camera. Everything about it just exudes quality, from the shutter sound to the build.

But to more directly answer your question:

Can you shoot hockey with a 20D? Absolutely. Will you get some great shots? Again-absolutely (with the right lenses). So if that's where your heart is really at-go for it.

blackwaterstudio

I was kinda turned off by the 4.3mp for the 1D. However the 8fps is nice. Also the reviews I've read said the 1D is not so great in higer ISO's which is where I'll be shooting most for the hockey team.

Any comments on this?

Mongrel

Well, from what I've heard...
the mega pixel issue *isn't*. Basically, the sensor on the 1D has pretty large photosites in comparison to the the 8mp cams out now. It is a physically larger sensor as well. I don't have any experience (yet) but others have reported having no problem printing 1D shots up to 20x30". It is important to get the best in-camera framing (cropping) you can though. There isn't a whole lot of wiggle room in this area compared to the 20D or 1D MkII-again this is what I have *heard*.

Regarding 1D and high ISO, apparently this only becomes a major issue when you attempt to adjust a shot that was not exposed properly. In other words, if you nail the exposure it won't be that much of an issue. Both the 20D and the 1D-2 will perform better in this area though. Also, with the noise reduction software available noise can be cleaned up pretty well without destroying image quality.

I wouldn't consider the 8fps as the only advantage of the 1D over the 20D. There are many aspects of the 1 Series cameras that make them truly 'pro' bodies that you should consider.

I saw another thread where you said you shoot hockey. I'm sure that you can get what you need from the 20D. But the 1D may just make it a little easier.

Seeing how I just got my 1D yesterday (well..Saturday), I'm really not in a postition to do more for you than parrot what I've heard and read. Hopefully someone else will join in and provide some hands on experience with this comparison.

In the meanwhile you may want to read this:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/148200

This is the experience of Nill using and comparing the 1D to the 20D for sports. You can tell immediately by his shots that he knows what he's doing. I have no problem beliving him on this issue.

Hope this helps...

Baldy

I own a 20D and rented a MKII for a weekend shoot so I've had some time to compare those two.

I'm thoroughly in love with the 20D and think it's quite a tough trade-off with the 1D or MKII, depending on what you shoot.

With the 20D and soccer players like Nill shoots, the AI servo seems to keep up, partly because they don't run at you too fast and partly because they have so much contrast for the AF to work with.

My dog, on the other hand, didn't represent such a high-contrast focus point. As long as he was running across the field, I could focus on him but he could outrun the Servo coming at me (70-200 f2.8 IS Canon).





I don't know where hockey players fall, but maybe half way between dogs and soccer players? The MKII has really amazing autofocus.

I have to admit that when split-second timing lets you get the shot like in soccer, 8 fps is sure nice...

On the resolution, I see a jillion pics a month come through smugmug and the number of pixels is overrated. I just made two 30x40" prints, one at 100 dpi and one at 200 dpi. Some very discerning pro-photographer eyes around the table could not tell the difference between the two, even looking very closely. They were both stunning.

For me with soccer, I really like being able to get close with my 70-200, and the fuller frame of the MKII was a bummer.

Thanks,
Baldy

P.S. The 20D sure is nice to carry around for sports shooting because it's so light.

Aaron Wilson

20d owner
I have a few sports pics on my web page. I own a 20D and wouldn't trade it for anything unless I could get my hands on the 1d mark2... I love shooting with it. I think the best media I had ever used was the hitachi 4g... it seemed to write faster then the cf cards... but the microdrive went south after 4 uses.

mercphoto

jdsphotography wrote:

Wish I had the money for a 1DsMKII, but would have to sell my truck

Anyways, with as much as I've been shooting of the hockey games, I'm thinking about upgrading from my 300D to a 20D.

Whats your take on this? Is it a good camera to shoot sports with? FPS high enough? AI Servo?

The 20D is much better for sports than a 300D is. I found that out for myself as well doing youth football. A 1DMkII will be better still, but not really because of 8fps. The AI Servo focus tracking is much better still.

How much are 1DMkII's going for used? (and that's the 8MP 1.3 crop factor body, correct? I get the 1-series confused all the time)

blackwaterstudio

Thanks for the reply guys. I would love to be able to pick a 1-series camera up, but don't think the funds will allow me to do so, which was the main reason for wanting a 20D body.

mercphoto

Me, too

jdsphotography wrote:

I would love to be able to pick a 1-series camera up, but don't think the funds will allow me to do so, which was the main reason for wanting a 20D body.

Same reason I bought a 20D. You will be very happy. I think you'll also love the improved auto-white-balance. It nearly nevery fails me now, which the 300D did way too often.

Steve Cavigliano

jdsphotography wrote:

Thanks for the reply guys. I would love to be able to pick a 1-series camera up, but don't think the funds will allow me to do so, which was the main reason for wanting a 20D body.

Well, if you can't swing the 1D Mk II, then the 20D is the next best thing, IMO. As Mongrel points out, you'd think 5fps would be plenty for sports shooting. But, once you get used to it, you can see where 3 more fps would get you even more keepers. Especially, in fast paced sports like hockey or basketball.

So get the 20D. That way you'll already have a great backup once you do buy a Mk II :lol

Good luck,
Steve

blackwaterstudio

Steve Cavigliano wrote:

Well, if you can't swing the 1D Mk II, then the 20D is the next best thing, IMO. As Mongrel points out, you'd think 5fps would be plenty for sports shooting. But, once you get used to it, you can see where 3 more fps would get you even more keepers. Especially, in fast paced sports like hockey or basketball.

So get the 20D. That way you'll already have a great backup once you do buy a Mk II :lol

Good luck,
Steve

Yea I'm hoping I get enough back on my taxes I might be able to pickup a new 1DMKII. Then use the 20D as a backup, or just a carry around camera.

winger

I can tell your from experience of shooting hockey, I noticed a world of difference between my 20D and the rebel. Some 10D users say the autofocus doesnt track as well as the 10D but I never really had one to compare.

If you have the time to look through boat loads of photos to compare this season I have shot entirely with the 20D, so you can see the kinds of photos you can get in an arena without strobes ( I know some of the rinks in that southern league and what ever name it is under this year can be interesting at best so I am not sure what your light situation is, but then again Hockey East plays in some dank old rinks too).
Umass 04-05 Season: http://winger.smugmug.com/Sports/37894

Also I have shot a couple of other games in much lower light places, on is a D-III rink on amherst college campus, actually pretty well light for a little place and the other one is technically a D-I arena but well long story shot not light as well as the big boys. Those galleries are here: http://winger.smugmug.com/Sports/44466

Now for comparison, the season before I shot with a olympus 3040 ( a point and shoot I had used for a couple of years) and a D-rebel that I picked up in January.For the 03-04 season http://winger.smugmug.com/gallery/89222.

Now to be fair last season the only game I had a pass to were the two at the fleet center. Which are in the beginning of the gallery, but to be honest for the most part the pass doesnt necessairly give me that much better acess but it is so much easier to move around the rink ( I have just started to take advantage of open ice positions like in the PB).
And with the D-rebel I only had EF lens, I didnt pick up my first L until this summer and I would like to think I have learned a ton about photography over the last year.

So I dont think I have helped at all at this point but just giving you something to compare. Myself I am looking to proably get another body soon maybe a DI but I wouldnt give up my 20D for it, it would be something to complement my kit....but I may want to get a big lens first or maybe some strobes.

In short I love my 20D and I think it takes some pretty kick ass hockey photos.