upgrade for amateur sports photography? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 31 Old 07-28-2019, 10:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
upgrade for amateur sports photography?

I'll try to keep this short, but i've been looking and weighing options for years, waiting for the right time and product and i'm now at a bit of a crossroads. I've been using a canon t3i for years, with just the 18-55mm kit lens. I recently purchased a canon 55-250mm lens for outdoor photography(track and field, and beach vb). I had plans to purchase a sigma 17-50mm F2.8 lens to help with indoor sports(volleyball, basketball, badminton), and upgrade cameras to the t7i. However, i'm not sure this is the best option for me anymore.

Of course, you'll need to know more about what and how i shoot...

What I'm currently doing:
INDOOR SPORTS
-T3i
-18-55mm lens
-'sports' setting
-i stand courtside so the focal range is suitable, but with the kit lens it's hard to get fast enough exposures

OUTDOOR SPORTS
-T3i
-55-250mm lens
-'sports' setting
-i roam around a lot, but it's nice to have a lot of reach so i can take pics across a field without having to walk(no time) and miss things. All daytime shooting so exposures are almost always in the 1/1000-1/2000s range

What I want to upgrade:
INDOOR SPORTS
-i want to get cleaner/sharper images(camera with better ISO capabilities, lens with larger aperture)
-maybe video. I don't use the t3i to record games because it only runs for like 15mins. If I use video, I need to be able to hit record before warm ups, and not touch it again until the game is over.
-I want more FPS. My current strategy/ability is to simply hold down the shutter, then pick the 'winner' of the bunch. With the T3i, and 3fps most of the time i miss the perfect moment, and have to settle with a shot just a touch too early/late.

OUTDOOR SPORTS
-Pretty much the same as the last point for indoor shooting. I just want to capture more FPS so i can pull out a better timed image more often
-i also have issues with focus jumping off the subject, and on to trees. i can't control where the focus is applied when using sports mode on the t3i, i haven't been able to get good results without using it. I can't change settings fast enough to keep up with the action, so i'm kind of stuck in the auto modes


The considerations that led me to the T7i are pretty heavily based on price. It seems that in the canon line up(that i'm familiar with) the price nearly doubles to get anything more than the T7i. the 77d and 80d i don't think provide anything useful for my needs, so the next step up is really the 7dmkii. The only way i can afford that, is buying used. for reference, a new t7i will run me around $750, i've seen a 7dmkii used go up for $850(quoted 70k shutter count).

In searching beyond canon(definitely my comfort zone), i see that sony has some interesting options. they are quite a bit more money(closer to 1300), but it has me wondering if this is just a bad time to buy a new camera for me. On one hand, the t7i is near end of life and pretty cheap. DSLR's are well established, and there's a lot of affordable lenses. However, if i want to go mirrorless, that tech seems to be a little less established, and maybe still a couple generations away from being a good value.

anyway, the camera's from sony that caught my eye are the a6000, and a6400. the a6000 i have mostly crossed off my list. it caught my eye because it's around the same price as the t7i, offers 11fps, and seems comparable to the t7i except for the buffer. I could be wrong, but it seems from my research that the 6400 is probably the best value in that line right now. It's buffer can keep up to it's speed, and has some upgraded autofocus features.


I guess to sum up. I want fast shooting, suitable for indoor sports. Good autofocus, tracking is also important. I'm used to, and comfortable with canon, but willing to switch if there's a significant advantage(like 11fps vs 6fps), and anything over say $800 better have a real significant upgrade(compared to t7i). I also want to make sure that there is a lens available for $500ish or less for shooting indoor sports(like the sigma 17-50mm f2.8)

is there a camera i'm missing? some fatal flaw the spec sheet is hiding(like the a6000 can shoot 11fps, but then apparently you have to wait upwards of a min for the buffer to clear) or just talk some sense in to me, because i'm not prepared to put several thousand dollars into casually shooting high school sports for the kids to post on instagram later... thanks

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-28-2019 at 12:24 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 31 Old 07-29-2019, 08:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
I'll try to keep this short, but i've been looking and weighing options for years, waiting for the right time and product and i'm now at a bit of a crossroads. I've been using a canon t3i for years, with just the 18-55mm kit lens. I recently purchased a canon 55-250mm lens for outdoor photography(track and field, and beach vb). I had plans to purchase a sigma 17-50mm F2.8 lens to help with indoor sports(volleyball, basketball, badminton), and upgrade cameras to the t7i. However, i'm not sure this is the best option for me anymore.

Of course, you'll need to know more about what and how i shoot...

What I'm currently doing:
INDOOR SPORTS
-T3i
-18-55mm lens
-'sports' setting
-i stand courtside so the focal range is suitable, but with the kit lens it's hard to get fast enough exposures

OUTDOOR SPORTS
-T3i
-55-250mm lens
-'sports' setting
-i roam around a lot, but it's nice to have a lot of reach so i can take pics across a field without having to walk(no time) and miss things. All daytime shooting so exposures are almost always in the 1/1000-1/2000s range

What I want to upgrade:
INDOOR SPORTS
-i want to get cleaner/sharper images(camera with better ISO capabilities, lens with larger aperture)
-maybe video. I don't use the t3i to record games because it only runs for like 15mins. If I use video, I need to be able to hit record before warm ups, and not touch it again until the game is over.
-I want more FPS. My current strategy/ability is to simply hold down the shutter, then pick the 'winner' of the bunch. With the T3i, and 3fps most of the time i miss the perfect moment, and have to settle with a shot just a touch too early/late.

OUTDOOR SPORTS
-Pretty much the same as the last point for indoor shooting. I just want to capture more FPS so i can pull out a better timed image more often
-i also have issues with focus jumping off the subject, and on to trees. i can't control where the focus is applied when using sports mode on the t3i, i haven't been able to get good results without using it. I can't change settings fast enough to keep up with the action, so i'm kind of stuck in the auto modes


The considerations that led me to the T7i are pretty heavily based on price. It seems that in the canon line up(that i'm familiar with) the price nearly doubles to get anything more than the T7i. the 77d and 80d i don't think provide anything useful for my needs, so the next step up is really the 7dmkii. The only way i can afford that, is buying used. for reference, a new t7i will run me around $750, i've seen a 7dmkii used go up for $850(quoted 70k shutter count).

In searching beyond canon(definitely my comfort zone), i see that sony has some interesting options. they are quite a bit more money(closer to 1300), but it has me wondering if this is just a bad time to buy a new camera for me. On one hand, the t7i is near end of life and pretty cheap. DSLR's are well established, and there's a lot of affordable lenses. However, if i want to go mirrorless, that tech seems to be a little less established, and maybe still a couple generations away from being a good value.

anyway, the camera's from sony that caught my eye are the a6000, and a6400. the a6000 i have mostly crossed off my list. it caught my eye because it's around the same price as the t7i, offers 11fps, and seems comparable to the t7i except for the buffer. I could be wrong, but it seems from my research that the 6400 is probably the best value in that line right now. It's buffer can keep up to it's speed, and has some upgraded autofocus features.


I guess to sum up. I want fast shooting, suitable for indoor sports. Good autofocus, tracking is also important. I'm used to, and comfortable with canon, but willing to switch if there's a significant advantage(like 11fps vs 6fps), and anything over say $800 better have a real significant upgrade(compared to t7i). I also want to make sure that there is a lens available for $500ish or less for shooting indoor sports(like the sigma 17-50mm f2.8)

is there a camera i'm missing? some fatal flaw the spec sheet is hiding(like the a6000 can shoot 11fps, but then apparently you have to wait upwards of a min for the buffer to clear) or just talk some sense in to me, because i'm not prepared to put several thousand dollars into casually shooting high school sports for the kids to post on instagram later... thanks
It all comes down to how much you're willing to pay for improved image quality. The good news is that it will be easy to improve on the low light/indoor sports performance of your Canon. The bad news is that you will have to spend money on a larger sensor and faster lenses to do that. The greater the image quality, the more it will cost you.

A helpful resource is dxomark.com, which ranks all the cameras and lenses by their image quality. Look for a camera in your price range with a high Sports ("low light ISO") score, and try to match it with a fast lens in your desired focal length. Then read reviews of the cameras to see if they are suitable for sports photography (high shot rate, large buffer, accurate tracking autofocus).

For an upper limit, the best cameras for indoor sports today are arguably the Sony A9 and the Nikon D4/D5, paired with 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 zoom lenses. On the lower end, the new Sony RX100 VII may be worth looking at since it has a much better sensor than your Canon, very fast processing speed, and top notch autofocus.
hatchback is offline  
post #3 of 31 Old 07-29-2019, 09:54 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post
On the lower end, the new Sony RX100 VII may be worth looking at since it has a much better sensor than your Canon, very fast processing speed, and top notch autofocus.
this is the kind of advice i'm looking for. i was not aware the rx100 sensor was better. Assuming you mean compared to the t3i sensor, how would you say it compares to the t7i?

i fully understand that there's a world out there of elite sports cameras and lenses i'm just not going to get close to. i'm not in a position to justify spending thousands on a lens, unless it's going to be perfect in all scenarios (and I don't believe there is such a thing). To be honest, i don't have an issue with the quality of the photos i get from the t3i with the kit lens under good conditions, but i want to get that quality more often. Ultimately I will still be limited by my own abilities, and while i'm learning, it's never going to be more than a hobby. I really came into this looking at maybe around $1000 for body and lens, so i'm already jumping out of budget just considering something like the a6400 (sells for around 1250 body, 1350 with kit lens). i don't really have a hard budget, but i'd definitely like to be closer to 1000 than 2000

The RX100 VII is a bit new, so it's hard to find some hands on reviews that aren't 99% focused on it's video capabilities. I'm a bit hesitant to spend that kind of money on a point and shoot(it's about $400 more than buying a t7i body and the sigma 17-50mm lens), but 20fps is a ridiculous thing to overlook. I guess what has me second guessing the clear upgrade to a t7i or 7dmkii, is camera's like the RX100. While i'm not sure i want to lock myself into a point and shoot (keep in mind this would be my primary camera, not a travel camera), it makes me wonder if we're one generation or two away from seeing 20fps on an affordable mirrorless as well. i do find it a bit confusing that a point and shoot would have so many advantages over something like the a6400, or heck even the a7 if we're talking pure fps. i mean my 2 generation old phone can do 10fps at 19MP, but without a decent lens in front of it, it's almost never the right choice.

i will not be able to upgrade cameras again for quite some time, the used market here isn't great, so it's a safe bet to say i'll get no more than 50% of my investment back. so if it makes sense to wait another year, i'm patient enough to do that. I'm just also a little worried that there won't be a t8i, and i'm not 100% convinced i want to go mirrorless. i know what i'll be getting with a t7i, and that comfort has it's appeal, but i'm worried that's the only reason the t7i (or any dslr) seems like a good choice. if the t7i could do 10fps, i wouldn't even hesitate, or if the only options that had 10fps or more were $2000 and up, i wouldn't hesitate either.

every market is different, so for reference, these are the 'best' prices i've been able to find recently
-canon t7i body only $700
-sony a6400 body only $1250
-canon 7d mkii body only $1500 (though there is a used one locally for $850)
-sony RX100 VII $1600

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 12:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Your Canon T3i has a DxO score of 65, with a sports score of 793.

The Canon T7i has the same sensor as the 77D, which has a DxO 78 and sports 971. That's a noticable improvement on your T3i.

The RX100 V (earlier version of the VII) has DxO 70 and sports 586. That's about the same as your T3i, likely even a bit worse for indoor sports, so not worth it except for the burst rate and autofocus.

The Sony A6400 has DxO 83 and sports 1431, which is a noticable step up from the two Canons.

The other thing to consider is a faster lens for indoor sports. Regardless of camera, you will notice the huge image quality improvement in going from the Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 (DxO 14-15) to the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 (DxO 28).
hatchback is offline  
post #5 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 12:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,033
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3486 Post(s)
Liked: 1969
sports photography requires fast lens and fast autofocus. I have some fast last lenses that are slow to focus...so make sure you have both. I have a macro lens that is 2.8 and super slow focusing. also have a 1.8 portrait lens that is slow focusing. I would visit a site like fred miranda .com and do some research.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #6 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 10:04 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
thanks for the advice guys. As I said in my first post, i've been looking for quite some time. I have done a ton of research, and i am accepting the fact that i won't get pro quality shots in my budget.

from the research i've done(with canon in mind) the sigma 17-50mm f2.8 seems like probably my best bet for indoor sports for less than a grand. I'm pretty happy with the performance of the canon 55-250mm i bought for outdoor sports, so if i can just get more fps i'm sure i can pick out a better timed image.

if i move over to sony, the same sigma lens is available, but i haven't done nearly as much research into what else might be available for it. i'll also have to figure out a new longer zoom lens for outdoors


does anybody have an opinion/experience on the autofocus performance between the t7i and a6400? both of these cameras are so far beyond the t3i in this regard, i hardly even have a frame of reference to figure out if it's 'good enough' or not. I find with my t3i in sports mode, it 'has' to focus on whatever is center screen. it somewhat limits my ability to frame shots the way i'd like, and it often focuses on the background instead of the subject. When i can, i set up and switch the focus to manual so it doesn't change, but in many cases the action is too fast and this limits the photos i can take. for example, if i'm shooting volleyball, sometimes i'll focus in on the net area, then wait for an attack/block, but while that's happening i might miss a fantastic dig. so the other main consideration is the autofocus, and it's ability to track a subject. I've seen plenty of demos, and the sony especially seems great at locking onto a single person and sticking with them. But how do they perform when it's a group of people, and do you have to select your 'target' manually, or will it pick one and they stay with it until you refocus?

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #7 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 05:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 88
dpreview says Sony A6400 has better autofocus than Canon t7i. According to dpreview, the Sony is better at everything except ergonomics.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/can...bel-t7i-800d/2
hatchback is offline  
post #8 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 05:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,033
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3486 Post(s)
Liked: 1969
my slowest camera is an old nikon d700 that does 7 or 8 fps with grip...I couldnt see doing sports with less than that fps. maybe you should look at used stuff and get what you need. sports are super hard to photograph and indoors just makes something super hard to almost impossible. maybe grab a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 prime lens which can be had for 100-300 bux and try it out. also renting gear is really popular and a smart way to test stuff out. lensrental.com maybe?

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #9 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 06:38 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
any thoughts on the 7d mk ii?
it's definitely more expensive than the sony a6400, so i don't think it's necessarily the best option to buy new, but there is one for sale used for $850. It seems more comparable to the a6400 in most regards, but is an older design with older tech (especially the auto focus). maybe i'm just trying too hard to stick with canon

the sony a6400 definitely seems like it's in a 'sweet spot' of being expensive enough to perform well, but cheap enough to cut out some pro/enthusiast features i probably wouldn't use.

i may just plug away with the t3i for a bit longer, and wait for the prices to come down on the a6400, or perhaps an a6000 replacement might be more my speed.

anyway, thanks again everyone. i've been reading and reading, watching videos, everything i can, but it's tricky when most reviews focus on different uses than I intend and everybody has a different opinion on what's 'good enough'. so a little guidance as to what i need to pay attention to has been very helpful.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #10 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 07:07 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
my slowest camera is an old nikon d700 that does 7 or 8 fps with grip...I couldnt see doing sports with less than that fps. maybe you should look at used stuff and get what you need. sports are super hard to photograph and indoors just makes something super hard to almost impossible. maybe grab a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 prime lens which can be had for 100-300 bux and try it out. also renting gear is really popular and a smart way to test stuff out. lensrental.com maybe?
appreciate the thought, i live in a rural area in canada. there's 3 or 4 place within walking distance that i could rent a tractor, but any camera gear will need to be purchased online... i did look into lens rentals in canada, the ones i've seen don't offer nearly the selection lensrentals does, and the prices are about double(after conversion!). it might make sense if i was looking at 2000 dollar lenses. the paying 200bux to rent one for 3days might make sense. but they don't even have anything within my buying budget to try out. Looks like they can't get around the high costs of shipping, so it doesn't even make sense to stock a $500 lens if you have to charge $150 to rent it

the other thing is, it's not like i'm getting garbage using the t3i and kit lens (well maybe your standards are higher...). I mean in many shots the exposure is a little long(1/400s) and the iso can be problematic(looks grainy above 1600) but i'm still getting hundreds of good photos over the year, and have been able to print several off with great results. It's taken me some time to get used to the camera, figure out what works, for both the settings and the techniques, but to say it's almost impossible seems unfair to me. i'm just looking to take it to the next level. The shots i get outdoors with 1/2000s exposures are definitely a step up, and it seems reasonable to think a faster lens(f2.8) and a camera that can shoot relatively cleanly up to iso 3200-6400 should allow that.

as for using a prime lens, one of the kids at the school (digital pictures class) was shooting pics of a basketball game. I took over for a few minutes so she could get changed and warm up for our game. It was a cheaper nikon(i don't know the model number but the settings were WAY more basic than my t3i), and i believe a 50m f1.8. It was pretty cool working with the shallow depth of field, taking some shots along the bench, but for shooting anything on the court i hated it. I'm not saying it can't be done, but i'll choose a zoom lens over a prime for sports every single time. For most of what I shoot indoors, 50mm is too much zoom as well. with the 18-55mm kit lens, i usually live in the 18-30mm range. You have to remember i'm on the sidelines, not in the stands, so i'm often less than 20feet away

what does kill me is the 3fps. so many times i have a shot of a windup, and a follow through, but no contact. i mean i still usually end up with a dozen or so well timed photos, but i have to take like a 100 'bursts' to get that. So essentially i'm not needing better photos, i want more keepers. I understand there is a reason some lenses cost 3grand or more, but i'm not trying to match the performance of a 200mm f2.8 for $500. I just want to get the most i can out of what i can afford to spend.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-30-2019 at 07:37 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #11 of 31 Old 07-30-2019, 07:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,033
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3486 Post(s)
Liked: 1969
sounds like you can worry about a lens later and upgrade the camera that has faster fps, faster af, and bet iso ability. with those items upgraded with a newer model, think you should be impressed. look for something that can do 7fps, iso 3200/64000 clean. on nikon side it would be like d750 for 1200 new...we all know canon has something similar.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #12 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 10:17 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by torii View Post
sounds like you can worry about a lens later and upgrade the camera that has faster fps, faster af, and bet iso ability. with those items upgraded with a newer model, think you should be impressed. look for something that can do 7fps, iso 3200/64000 clean. on nikon side it would be like d750 for 1200 new...we all know canon has something similar.
thank you
yeah, i came into this journey looking to spend money on new lenses, as that's generally the conventional wisdom. But after some research, i realized even with new lenses, my camera is holding me back. I figured i should at least figure out a plan before i spend money on lenses that may not work with the next camera i buy.

fwiw, i looked up the d750 and it's more like $2000 new here, on sale... crazy what a difference an imaginary line can make

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-31-2019 at 10:27 AM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #13 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 11:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,033
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3486 Post(s)
Liked: 1969
this guy has a nice website and if ya email him will get back with ya...http://bythom.com/

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #14 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 03:06 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
thanks, lots of info there, should keep me busy

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #15 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 03:36 PM
Senior Member
 
ja00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 474
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 149
If all you photograph is sports, consider a used 1D series with prime lenses. I understand it's extra expense but good glass depreciates very little. Buy used on Fred Miranda or other reputable sites to save.



I shoot indoor volleyball using a 5D IV with 35mm, 135mm and 70-200mm f2.8 and sometimes struggle to get great images, especially in low light gyms. Learn how to use manual mode, you get better flexibility/control that way. Also plan your shoots, your location and what shots you want to take for that session. You have to accept that you will not capture all the great moments, but with proper positioning and some luck, you can get lots.



Read this website: https://zivnuska.zenfolio.com/blog/2...aph-volleyball


Helped me a lot. Good luck.
ja00 is offline  
post #16 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 05:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by ja00 View Post
If all you photograph is sports, consider a used 1D series with prime lenses. I understand it's extra expense but good glass depreciates very little. Buy used on Fred Miranda or other reputable sites to save.



I shoot indoor volleyball using a 5D IV with 35mm, 135mm and 70-200mm f2.8 and sometimes struggle to get great images, especially in low light gyms. Learn how to use manual mode, you get better flexibility/control that way. Also plan your shoots, your location and what shots you want to take for that session. You have to accept that you will not capture all the great moments, but with proper positioning and some luck, you can get lots.



Read this website: https://zivnuska.zenfolio.com/blog/2...aph-volleyball


Helped me a lot. Good luck.

appreciate the thoughts, but with consideration, I don't like the idea of this recommendation. going full frame at this point is like suggesting a used ferrari to somebody who wants a new corvette. It's more than just an entrance fee, everything goes up in price.

I usually am taking pics while coaching, which adds some difficulty to the 'plan ahead and set up' theory. I've been working out 'techniques' for about three years, and I honestly am pretty pleased with what I'm able to do. Not saying there isn't a better way, just that my situation is different than most. I've played with manual, aperture priority, shutter priority, and they all have their pros and cons. Ultimately, for me, the sports setting seems to work best. Everything changes too quickly for me to make manual adjustments. Then again, perhaps getting a constant aperture lens will make some of this easier.

most of the 'tutorials' i've read about sports photography start off talking about 200mm lenses and i immediately know they are not for me. The link was an interesting read, amazing how different 'high school volleyball' is down there. Those gyms look like our universities! and actually, i feel a little better about my own photography. He's got a lot more blur in the backgrounds(faster lenses, more zoom, more distance to the backgrounds all help) but i'm seeing some blur on the ball and players hands as well. That's kind of the thing i'm trying to improve on, i feel there's a touch too much motion blur in my indoor shots. When i saw the results i got outdoors with the 55-250 I wanted that indoors! To be clear, I'm not saying my shots are on par with his, just not as bad as i thought

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-31-2019 at 08:49 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #17 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 05:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
torii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,033
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3486 Post(s)
Liked: 1969
the way to improve indoor shots is to have a camera that has clean high iso so you can get a fast shutterspeed. you want 1/1000 or faster shutterspeeds for action. so either go outside in sun or get a high iso capable camera.

Power: Marantz sr7008, NAD C 275Bee x 2, Video: Oppo 103, Samsung 75un6300
Speakers: Focal aria 948, Focal cc900, Klipsch synergy KSF 10.5, Magnepan LRS
Subs: Rythmik FV25HP, Rythmik FV15HP
torii is online now  
post #18 of 31 Old 07-31-2019, 08:47 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
maybe it will help explain my goals and expectations using some of my own photos as examples. I mean what I consider good might not be what you consider good.

so first, some indoor shots. this is where i'd really like to improve. In reviewing my pictures, i will concede that 55mm doesn't quite have the reach i'd like, however, I am ok cropping a bit, and I have plenty of evidence that suggests i'm not awesome at getting the perfect framing if I zoom in too tight. I still don't see anything lens-wise that feels like a better fit than the 17-50mm F2.8 from sigma. To get more reach than 50mm, i need to give up the constant aperture, or wide angle, and both of those things i think are more important for me.

*excuse the erased faces. I don't know the rules about posting students photos (especially from other schools), so better safe than sorry*. Full size versions available at the links provided

anyway, here's some shots that show a typical image. I would like to clean it up and stop the motion more. if i could also blur the background more, that'd be cool, but not necessary as that can be faked in photoshop

https://drive.google.com/open?id=16h...dS7SibPqDakvzH
35mm
f4.5
1/400s
iso3200


https://drive.google.com/open?id=12o...vvo38Jh7cAmU1V
55mm
f5.6
1/400s
iso3200

I would use a shot like the following as a coaching aid to talk about their positioning(it's bad, it's all bad, haha), so while i don't necessarily care about the quality of an image like this, i do want to be able to capture a wide shot like this as well.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1K0...bpJJLNULS4HGaO
30mm
f4.5
1/400s
iso2000

again (i guess I forgot I did this until reviewing photos), I shoot a lot of images for coaching purposes so I like to get the whole court in the shot. If they can pull double duty, and be clean enough for a cropped picture to be passable for a blog or instagram post, even better.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ib...U-3OWBWWbqYJa8
25mm
f4
1/320s
iso2500

The above image cropped. I'm ok with the level of detail here, but it really starts to show the noise. anything over iso800 will show this on my camera, by 3200 it's pretty bad.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=12c...2ykzlNgq-C2np6

Here's an example where on top of the above issues, i need that fast FPS because i miss the best part.
These two shots are consecutive, and you can see the ball is nearly out of frame, and then back out of frame. I'm missing a TON of action in the middle

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wN...huOkqvghRa1bo0

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Xc...fKQbEhrirxTsQ4
18mm
f3.5
1/320s
iso1600

Now if I look at some of the shots I got outdoors using the 55-250mm lens, they are much much nicer imo. I suspect I will never get the kind of background blur when using a 18-55mm from only a few feet off the court, but I'd at least like to be able to stop the motion more, and reduce the noise in the image. And of course, add some FPS so I have a better chance of getting that perfectly timed photo.

so anyway, these are all shots i'm happy with. I consider these 'good', and would be thrilled to get shots like this indoors from courtside. I did use the 55-250mm to shoot some badminton from the stands, and it gave me similar looking shots as far as the background blur, but obviously i'm still stuck with the high iso and slow shutter issues as with the 18-55mm.

Missed the framing slightly on this one, but I'm happy with the performance of the gear

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rk...9d7mLksTQxXRyv
250mm
f5.6
1/1600s
iso400

It's a real pain trying to focus through the net. I had to focus, then switch to manual, to avoid it from jumping to the net.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Gx...E8MyoL4O-3SjQz
250mm
f5.6
1/2000s
iso1000

Again my framing is a little off, and man do we ever need to talk about that technique... but i like the quality of this image

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1W_...Xc3cxgOW6ZYGRS
229mm
f5.6
1/2000s
iso400

Generally happy again with the quality of this image, however with 3fps, it seems to be the perfect pace to catch runners is the same position of their stride every shot. If they have knee up on the first, they have knee up on the second, third, etc. So it really becomes luck as to whether I get them in an interesting or goofy looking part of their stride

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kb...N-AoXi0_tMY1iw

I'm so mad about these two. I was playing with the shutter priority mode, and based off my results(which had been all indoors up to that point) i was shooting at 1/400s. I should have been well over 1/1000's (or is that under? whatever the faster one is...), but the real kicker is I didn't realize I left the picture adjustment on. It was super bright that day, i couldn't see anything on the lcd screen and I ended up shooting half the day like this, so all the pics look like they have some instagram filter on them.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1fz...KBX3kpgFP8-zxE
135mm
f7.1
1/400s
iso100


https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Nl...Jhl4xC8Qj9ey_q
157mm
f8
1/400s
iso100

I was shooting in this mode because it allowed me to select my focus point (sports mode is locked into the middle). I was struggling to stay locked onto the players, the camera was focusing on the trees in the background instead. I tried using the aperture priority setting, but it would slow down the shutter way more than increase the iso. So it wasn't great for shooting sports imo. I could probably work into the shutter priority mode, but i need some more experience to know how quick i can get away with. it's challenging with my lenses too, since i can use a faster exposure when i'm wide vs zoomed in.

but of course, the extra light, the extra zoom, none of it helps with the ol' fps issue. so that's still an area with plenty of room for improvement. The other thing, is the camera staying focused on the subject. Sometimes it's something I have to work around. If i have time to manually focus, that's one thing, trying to avoid high contrast objects in the background is another, but sometimes i really feel i have to blame the camera. In this series of shots i had good focus for 2 or 3 pics, then lost focus right at the 'perfect shot', and then it regained focus on the next shot. I was shooting through a net, but it doesn't appear that it focused on the net, it just went blurry.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1E9...cP9LIUJ5Vvejtr

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1R0...lvz1FD5fdC1IVf

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Qc...pg_gy9jrT77_Zv
79mm
f5
1/800s
iso100

hopefully this post doesn't chase away help. Not trying to prove anything(clearly most of the pics here have issues) but maybe shed some light on what my actual expectations are. I'm not selling anything, at best they'll end up as a 4x3 in the yearbook
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1_35mm_F4.5_400s_iso3200.JPG
Views:	41
Size:	4.09 MB
ID:	2596962   Click image for larger version

Name:	2_18mm_f3.5_320s_iso1600.JPG
Views:	40
Size:	3.75 MB
ID:	2596964   Click image for larger version

Name:	3_18mm_f3.5_320s_iso1600.JPG
Views:	44
Size:	3.70 MB
ID:	2596966   Click image for larger version

Name:	4_25mm_f4_320s_iso2500.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	3.92 MB
ID:	2596968   Click image for larger version

Name:	4_25mm_f4_320s_iso2500cropped.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	772.9 KB
ID:	2596970  

Click image for larger version

Name:	5_30mm_f4.5_400s_iso2000.JPG
Views:	37
Size:	4.31 MB
ID:	2596972   Click image for larger version

Name:	6_55mm_f5.6_400s_iso3200.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	3.90 MB
ID:	2596974   Click image for larger version

Name:	79mm_f5_800s_iso100(1).JPG
Views:	42
Size:	4.31 MB
ID:	2596976   Click image for larger version

Name:	79mm_f5_800s_iso100(2).JPG
Views:	41
Size:	6.43 MB
ID:	2596978   Click image for larger version

Name:	79mm_f5_800s_iso100(3).JPG
Views:	40
Size:	7.68 MB
ID:	2596980  

Click image for larger version

Name:	135mm_f7.1_400_iso100_tv.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	3.75 MB
ID:	2596982   Click image for larger version

Name:	157mm_f8_400s_iso100_tv.JPG
Views:	44
Size:	4.63 MB
ID:	2596984   Click image for larger version

Name:	229mm_f5.6_2000s_iso400.JPG
Views:	41
Size:	3.23 MB
ID:	2596986   Click image for larger version

Name:	250mm_f5.6_1600s_iso400.JPG
Views:	38
Size:	3.29 MB
ID:	2596988   Click image for larger version

Name:	250mm_f5.6_2000s_iso320.JPG
Views:	41
Size:	2.65 MB
ID:	2596990  

Click image for larger version

Name:	250mm_f5.6_2000s_iso1000.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	3.42 MB
ID:	2596992  
ja00 likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #19 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 03:03 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
well... so much for having a plan

I've come across a rather significant catch with switching over to the sony, and that is finding competitive lenses. it seems like, while not quite as big of a jump as going full frame, the sony is positioned at a higher point in the market, and as such has much fewer options for inexpensive lenses.

what this boils down to:
-Canon T7i ~$700
-Canon 55-250mm lens (already own)
-Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 ~$500
Total package: ~$1200


-Sony A6400 ~$1250
-Sony 55-210mm ~$310
-Sony 16-50mm Kit lens ~$100(if purchased with camera)
--alt: Sony 18-135mm kit lens ~$550(if purchased with camera)
Total Package: ~$1660-2110

I can't find a good 3rd party(or sony) lens with the zoom range and large aperture i want for indoor sports for the a6400. It seems that using an adapter is possible, but may reduce the performance of auto focus features, if they work at all. The adapters are also a couple hundred dollars, which is not insignificant to me.

I had kind of settled in on the a6400, but if i can't find a suitable larger aperture zoom lens to put on it for indoor sports, is it really the best option for me? am i crazy to think the t7i with a f2.8 lens is going to perform better than the sony with an f4 lens, even though that sony combo is double the price! and when i start looking at $1000 lenses for the sony, something like the 7d mkii starts to look affordable.


so i guess i need some recommendations for lenses to pair with the sony. Am i'm missing something (quite possibly) or is this another premium i'll have to consider?

I figure that i want something comparable to the 18-55mm zoom range for indoor with the largest aperture that still allows me to get consistent focus on moving subjects. I thought f2.8 seemed like a good balance between speed and depth of field from my research, but i have little experience with anything wider than f3.5. I would like to get a little more reach(70 or 85mm, maybe even 135) but i can not give up much on the wide end. Having reviewed my photos, i realize i do a lot of 'functional photography' where i'm trying to show positioning, etc. obviously cost matters too. it seems like with the kit lenses, both sony and canon charge a steep premium for the 18-135mm. Neither is a large aperture lens anyway, so maybe i'm asking for too much, in which case i'd definitely take a larger aperture over the extra zoom.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #20 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 03:21 PM
Newbie
 
oducks2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Canon 5DM3, Canon 70-200mm F2.8. You will spend money, both are usually available used always. On the upside, you will be done with worrying about gear.
oducks2 is offline  
post #21 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 04:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
in all fairness, for that kind of money i'd be all over a sony a7 and laugh at the 6fps of a 5d. heck, it'd make even more sense just to stick with the a6400 and spend the difference on lenses. Remember my issue with the a6400 is not it's quality, or the options for lenses available. my issue is that the lenses available are significantly more expensive, prohibitively so, which has me realistically saying my options are a t7i with decent glass (we're still not talking high end by any means) vs a a6400 with the kit lens. If i had 4grand to throw around, my options would be vastly different.

i'm pretty sure that compared to the t3i, even the t7i would put a smile on my face.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 08-05-2019 at 05:09 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #22 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 05:32 PM
Newbie
 
oducks2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5
You can be into a 5D3 and 70-200mm for about $2k. Probably the best thing to do is rent your options and see what actually fits you best before spending a big amount. Sony is good kit, but it is hard to beat the massive amount of high quality Canon glass available in the used market and to rent. Oh, and you should see the noise in a 5D3 ISO 12800 image.

If you want better IQ on what you have, you can use again the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 and the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 beware tho that if you plan to go full frame the 17-55mm is crop sensor only. I would also suggest getting use to using aperture priority and single focus point.

If your really focused on the spray and pray method a cheaper upgrade path for you might be the Canon M50 that gives you 10fps and better lens options.
oducks2 is offline  
post #23 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 06:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
please remember I live in a rural area outside a not so major canadian city. the used market is essentially a few pawn shops, the 'best' options i've found for renting gear cost more for a 3day rental than i'm looking to spend on BUYING(they offer only high end glass worth well over my budget), and whatever price you think is fair, it's double here (i exaggerate, but not by as much as i wish...)

let me put things this way. for the past 3 or so years, i've focused on trying to learn better methods. i've dabbled with manual modes, aperture priority, and shutter priority. I have improved, but i've gotten to a point where the methods suggested no longer seem feasible to my particular needs. This past year we hosted a provincial championship, and it was for an age I don't coach, so the whole time I got to roam around freely and take photos. It was a VASTLY different experience than what i'm doing most of the time. It was a very enjoyable experience, i'd argue it was a much easier experience too. But what I'm getting to, is that I don't normally get the luxury of paying attention to the photography. I'm actively coaching while snapping pics. Following the action and predicting where the ball goes, that's second nature, but thinking about lighting, exposures, apertures, etc is not only difficult, but would actively interfere with me doing the job I'm actually there for.

my experience with the manual modes could be summed up as follows (and this is specifically with the t3i, which likely has limitations that newer models don't):
Manual
-nope
-but seriously, there's way too much going on for me to think i can get it right the first time. I use this when i'm taking repeatable, 'set up' shots. Using this for action shots i honestly think i have less than 1% keeper rate.

Aperture Priority
-essentially useless, since i always want the largest aperture possible, and that's basically exactly what the sports setting already provides
-the pro to using this, is it allows some more control with the focusing. I'm not restricted to the center point only. so i liked this when shooting beach vb and i could focus on the bottom part of the screen when my subjects were, to avoid the camera focusing on the trees in the background
-the con, and ultimately deal breaker, is that with the t3i it seems to prioritize a lower ISO over a faster exposure. For sports, this was killer. I had plenty of low noise, blurry photos

Shutter Priority
-the one mode that may become useful in the future
-as with above, the main advantage to this over sports was having a few more options i could control
-the downside was that i really wasn't able to accurately predict the perfect exposures, which means i'd really need to shoot raw and spend time fixing them afterwards.
-the other challenge was even if i knew what i needed, i really didn't find an improvement over the sports mode

really, to sum it up, i wasn't able to get significantly better quality images using the manual modes, but the consistency in which i got usable photos went down. I think for me, my abilities, my needs, etc i really want the camera to handle things.

i'll look at the m50 again. I can't remember off hand why, but i had crossed off all the mirrorless cameras from canon, deciding the t7i was most definitely a better option. when i started looking, i was super confused by the line up from canon. i'm still pretty confused to be honest. They seem to all be clumped together at about the same price point and i can't really tell what makes them different(other than some having viewfinders and others don't)

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #24 of 31 Old 08-05-2019, 10:08 PM
Newbie
 
oducks2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 5
That makes sense. Have you considered just getting a video camera and putting it on a tripod? Then you are near guaranteed to get your functional stuff without sacrificing your photos.

You will get better body performance moving to something newer, I would probably consider a 70D/80D over a T7i, but if you are female the T series might fit you better, but I would probably go M50 over either. I think it's cheaper. $20 adapter gets you access to every Canon lens. The M50 is my pocket camera coupled with a 32mm F1.4. I have or have had a 60D, 70D, 5Dm3, M50, M100.

Lenses I would still say the EFS-17-55mm f2.8 and the EF-70-200mm f2.8L (This is probably the most used lens in the world for sports and journalists). I would only use a Sigma if it was an Art lens, but I admit I haven't tried their new Sports/Contemporary stuff.

When you say you always want to shoot at the largest aperture, the only way to make sure you are is aperture priority mode. You should also manually set the ISO, you already have a good idea what it should be for your setup. With the single focus point, you wouldn't have those net/tree/random selection issues.

Are you shooting in raw/jpeg? That can help save more images. Sometimes too the shots with more noise than you want, are good candidates for B&W where grain can actually enhance the image.
ja00 likes this.
oducks2 is offline  
post #25 of 31 Old 08-06-2019, 09:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by oducks2 View Post
That makes sense. Have you considered just getting a video camera and putting it on a tripod? Then you are near guaranteed to get your functional stuff without sacrificing your photos.
that is a thought. i used to film games but stopped because the t3i only does like 15mins before shutting off. I used a cheaper handheld video camera that i borrowed from my dad, so as of right now i really only have my phone that i could use for this. but it's worth considering again

Quote:
Originally Posted by oducks2 View Post
You will get better body performance moving to something newer, I would probably consider a 70D/80D over a T7i, but if you are female the T series might fit you better, but I would probably go M50 over either. I think it's cheaper. $20 adapter gets you access to every Canon lens. The M50 is my pocket camera coupled with a 32mm F1.4. I have or have had a 60D, 70D, 5Dm3, M50, M100.
the t7i is available for $720 (body only) and the m50 is a bit weird. The lowest i've seen for body only is $700, but it's also selling with a kit lens for $700. I suspect, from my quick research, i had originally crossed it off my list partially from confusion, and partially because i couldn't find the fps. it's SUPER hidden for this model for some reason. not even canon's own website listed it, i had to find it from reviews(and i only looked because you said it was 10fps which is great). It does say that it only gets 10fps with locked focus though. I'm not sure how much that will matter, since i'd be mostly taking pics of the same subject from the same distance(like a block or spike), but it could be an issue if i'm trying to track somebody chase down a shanked ball or some of the outdoor stuff(people running on the track!). so i'm still a bit unsure on that.

i could certainly be wrong, but i got the impression the 80D's improvements were more geared towards video? I remember watching a few comparison videos between the 77D, T7i, and 80D and came out of them pretty convinced the T7i was the better value for me. it's been a long road though, and i honest can't even remember for sure why. it is about $300 more, so that could be why i was initially put off

Quote:
Originally Posted by oducks2 View Post
Lenses I would still say the EFS-17-55mm f2.8 and the EF-70-200mm f2.8L (This is probably the most used lens in the world for sports and journalists). I would only use a Sigma if it was an Art lens, but I admit I haven't tried their new Sports/Contemporary stuff.
and while this is useful info, what this really becomes is a decision of whether or not i even bother. those lenses are without question out of my budget. the 70-200mm is $2500($1750 for non-is version), and the 17-55mm is $1200 here. the 70-200mm i for sure can't justify since i'm actually 100% satisfied with the quality i was getting out of the canon 55-250mm. Since i would only ever require that much zoom when shooting outdoors, i don't really need the f2.8 as i was already able to get well exposed shots with 1/1000 to 1/2000s exposures. From the reviews i've seen comparing the sigma 17-50mm and canon 17-55mm, there was nothing that made me think i needed to spend more for the canon. It was a teeny bit sharper in the corners, but seemed real comparable in the middle. so it really seemed like this particular sigma found a good balance between performance and price. If i'm not able to get satisfactory results with a lens like the sigma 17-50mm, then i really shouldn't bother at all. If that's the case, that's useful information too, i'd rather buy nothing than waste $1200 on a new camera and lens just to be disappointed. I still kinda feel like the t7i(or better) with the sigma will give me an appreciable improvement though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oducks2 View Post
When you say you always want to shoot at the largest aperture, the only way to make sure you are is aperture priority mode. You should also manually set the ISO, you already have a good idea what it should be for your setup. With the single focus point, you wouldn't have those net/tree/random selection issues.
there doesn't seem to be any difference in behaviour between me using aperture priority mode, and sports mode(or even just regular manual mode). Unless i'm missing something. The lenses i have now aren't constant, so the aperture is constantly changing as i zoom, but in both manual modes it will stay at the max for any given zoom, and that's exactly what the sports mode does as well. The advantage to the manual modes is that i could set the aperture to something smaller if i wanted. Like if i set it to f5.6, then it would remain at the same aperture throughout the whole zoom range, whereas the sports mode would always try to use the largest aperture possible. hope that makes sense

the only problem i have with manually setting the iso, i know where 'good' and 'good enough' live, but i'd rather have a properly exposed 'good enough' than an underexposed 'good'. or i'd rather have a motion stopping 'good enough' than a blurry 'good' pic. The camera lets me set a maximum iso, which i have set to 3200 right now. my original thought was with a faster lens i could reduce that to 1600. The sports mode seems to do a pretty good job of balancing iso and exposure settings to get the fastest possible shutter and the lowest possible iso. i would agree that there's room for improvement, i just don't like all the pictures i screwed up trying to 'learn' over the years. i'm pretty confident that if i can use a faster lens, and a camera that shoots clean up to 3200, i can get good pics indoors with at least 1/600s exposures. I'm pretty close to those exposures with my current set up, but iso3200 is far from clean

can you elaborate a bit on the single focus point comment? my understanding is that with sports mode i'm stuck with a single point, and that point HAS to be the point in the middle. There's only like 9 or something to choose from, but in the manual modes i can choose any one of the 9 points. everything beyond that is new to me

Quote:
Originally Posted by oducks2 View Post
Are you shooting in raw/jpeg? That can help save more images. Sometimes too the shots with more noise than you want, are good candidates for B&W where grain can actually enhance the image.
i have more or less given up on shooting raw. i was doing 'raw + jpeg' for a while, but i never ended up touching a raw file for basically a full year. I tend to offload photos more frequently these days, so storage isn't really an issue. it's something i should probably start doing again, but as of now is a bit outside my comfort zone.

thanks for taking the time, i really appreciate it. i mean i've read a LOT of articles and reviews and stuff, but being able to ask questions directly is really helpful, so thanks again

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 08-06-2019 at 09:22 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #26 of 31 Old 08-10-2019, 08:01 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
well, rumour mills are suggesting canon may be announcing some new cameras by the end of the month. VB season starts by then, but considering the T7i, 80D, and 7Dmkii are all pretty old tech i can only see one of two things happening with this announcement. Either the replacement is significantly better and competes with the sony, in which case i'll probably buy it and use the lenses i'm familiar with. Or it will be a a small upgrade, but push down the prices on at least one of these no longer 'current gen' models, possibly saving me money. Ok, i guess a third option, it could totally not meet my needs, and give me more reason to buy sony...

the rumour is for a "90D" to supposedly replace the 80D and 7Dmkii, and an M6 mkii. The specs i've read seem like complete guesses by the people writing the articles, but I'm hoping if it's replacing the 7D it'll have at least 10fps as well.

considering the 80D is currently selling for just over a grand, i suspect the 90d will be a little more than the a6400 at best, maybe more. I'm usually more comfortable buying a product that's mid-life, but it seems like my options from canon will either be rookie or retired right now.

I think if the 90D is announced, and it looks promising, i'll purchase the sigma 17-50mm F2.8 lens and keep an eye on the 90D prices. I didn't want to buy that lens, and then jump ship on canon two months later since i won't be able to sell it for much around here. but if canon is my upgrade path, then it makes sense. Maybe it'll even help me get better results with the t3i


fingers crossed canon has something good coming

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #27 of 31 Old 08-23-2019, 08:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
hope i'm not annoying everybody bumping this back up...

so some specs for the canon 90D seem to be floating around now, and it does look like a pretty good fit for my needs. a pretty decent, but not revolutionary update of the 80D.
Highlights for me include:
-10fps
-dslr compatible with my current lenses, or any lenses i buy for my current camera

some questionable(i don't know if they will be good in practice) but interesting features
-face detect AF with the viewfinder
-eye detect AF with live view
-32.5MP (not that i've ever really had an issue with the 18MP of the T3i as much as i've had an issue with lenses being able to provide enough detail)

some significant unknowns at the present time
-how many images can be taken at 10fps before filling the buffer
-cost

some minor, but still notable disappointments
-video recording limited to 30mins (compared to a6400 having no limit. i don't record games anymore, but mostly because i've accepted the t3i and it's 15min limit isn't usable)
-4k video may not be actual 4k, but rather upscaled to 4k?? (even if true, i wouldn't consider this a deal breaker, as i don't personally have anything that is compatible with watching 4k, not even my PC's seem to be able to handle it smoothly, but this camera might still be in use 10yrs for now...)
-120fps video might also be pretty bad. apparently other canon cameras that offer 1080p/120 have implemented it so poorly it's not very useful. my cell phone does 960fps at 720p, and 120fps at 1080p and i can totally understand that simply having a higher fps doesn't mean it'll be useful. the 960fps mode is very poor quality, and i would always choose the 120fps option. the slow motion is an interesting feature that i find useful when coaching during practice. I have to admit though, it would have to be pretty spectacular for me to lug out a DSLR to use it during practice though. so this probably isn't a deal breaker either, but it does seem like sony might have another win in this category

if any of you have been paying attention to the leaked specs, you'll know there's a lot more info there, but most of it is not relevant to my needs, so i tried to boil it down to the key points. Here's the thing, from reading and hearing the impressions of some reviewers online, obviously all speculation at this point, i'm hearing comments like 'it should be pretty good for action and sports because even though it's not the most fps, it's going to focus much faster using the cross-type AF points'. Here's the question, are they simply comparing the speed of Canon's two AF methods, or are all mirrorless camera's still a little slower than DSLR? Let's say for argument, the a9/a7 from sony is not included. would a good canon DSLR focus and track moving subjects better or worse than say a sony a6400?

it just seems like most reviewers are comparing mirrorless to mirrorless or dslr to dslr, or at best comparing video where the dslr is in live view mode. it seems like most of the reviews i read early in my search talked about canon's dual pixel AF being pretty much industry standard for live view phase detection AF, so it's throwing me for a loop to hear that it's still 'way faster' to focus through the viewfinder. if this is true, and the sony a6400, along with any other mirrorless in my budget, is limited to a similar AF, then it seems sticking with a DSLR still makes sense, even if i lose out on the fancy eye detection and what not.

the big catch though, is price. the only number i've heard thrown out so far was 1200USD, which could very easily mean 2000CAD. The 80D is hovering around $1000CAD right now. the sony a6400 at 1150CAD. the 90D sounds like a good fit, but only if it's in the same ballpark as the a6400 i think. This should give me similar speed(10fps vs 11fps) and maybe faster AF (???) and most importantly be compatible with my current lenses. So I could still buy a faster f2.8 lens to use on my t3i now, and be able to use that on the D90 down the road(maybe wait for a good sale). if i go the sony route, then i can't really buy any more lenses now, because i won't be able to sell them later.


so, maybe it's best to consider the AF on the 80D and 7D mk ii since those products have actually been seen and used. Is focusing through the viewfinder on an 80d or 7d mk ii 'way faster' than using dual pixel AF in live view? Is focusing through the viewfinder on those cameras faster than focusing on the a6400? or was that one reviewer who said that not correct?

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 08-23-2019 at 08:18 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #28 of 31 Old 08-24-2019, 10:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
P&Struefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 402 Post(s)
Liked: 141
When you say good/fast AF you really have to differentiate between taking stills or shooting video. In stills, faster and more responsively snapping the subject into focus is always better but not in video. In video, you have to factor in the smoothness of the focus transitions and how reliable it can hold on to the focus when the subject moves, turns or changes the orientation facing the camera. Even when the camera misses the focus it often also counts how "gracefully" the AF behaves before it or you as the operator can recover and get it into focus again.

The Canon 80D is one of the best AF camera IN VIDEO as was the predecessor before it, the 70D considering the above mentioned AF characteristics. I myself also use the HD only Canon C100 cinema camera quite regularly for my paid work and it works at least as well as, if not better than those Canon consumer cameras in terms of video autofocus.

The latest Sonys are also good in that regards and I have heard great things about video AF from people who use their latest A7R Mk4. As from my experience, the much lower priced crop models such as the A6400 or A6500 are already good enough at AF for video if you use only newer native Sony lenses and know what you are doing.
P&Struefan is offline  
post #29 of 31 Old 08-25-2019, 09:07 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,993
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by P&Struefan View Post
When you say good/fast AF you really have to differentiate between taking stills or shooting video. In stills, faster and more responsively snapping the subject into focus is always better but not in video. In video, you have to factor in the smoothness of the focus transitions and how reliable it can hold on to the focus when the subject moves, turns or changes the orientation facing the camera. Even when the camera misses the focus it often also counts how "gracefully" the AF behaves before it or you as the operator can recover and get it into focus again.

The Canon 80D is one of the best AF camera IN VIDEO as was the predecessor before it, the 70D considering the above mentioned AF characteristics. I myself also use the HD only Canon C100 cinema camera quite regularly for my paid work and it works at least as well as, if not better than those Canon consumer cameras in terms of video autofocus.

The latest Sonys are also good in that regards and I have heard great things about video AF from people who use their latest A7R Mk4. As from my experience, the much lower priced crop models such as the A6400 or A6500 are already good enough at AF for video if you use only newer native Sony lenses and know what you are doing.
in all cases, every consideration is always about shooting sports photography, always. Indoor volleyball, basketball, badminton, outdoor beach volleyball, and track and field. I have no real interest in video performance, and at the very least i can say i will never do anything 'cinematic' with the camera. if i record video, it will be of sports, where i don't really want the focus moving much and wouldn't use a shallow depth of field if at all possible.

every review i can find that compares the a6400 to any kind of dslr from canon is 100% about video performance. i feel i know more than enough about the difference in video performance. but i can't find much for stills, or specifically sports photography. the closest i've seen was a review comparing the 7dmkii to an a6300. In that review the 7d was declared the winner, but the main factor seemed to be the buffer. the 7d goes essentially forever, and the a6300 had a tiny buffer and slow write speed. the a6400 by all accounts has fixed this buffer issue at least to the point it shouldn't be a problem with normal action.

i think what's getting me with the AF is just the specs. When i hear something like 400+ AF points vs 45, and automatic eye/face/subject tracking vs 'kinda has face tracking', and 'fastest autofocus ever' it really seems like the sony a6400 should be better in every way. and yet, the real world tests and opinions lead me to believe that the dslr still has an advantage in quick autofocus on moving subjects, at least in the sub $2000 models.

it may also be useful to know that i'm not often using a really shallow depth of field. my current lenses are only f3.5 max(most of the zoom range i use being 4.5-5.6) and i'm hoping to pick up an f2.8 if i stick with canon. i don't foresee purchasing anything faster than that, unless options and prices change drastically. the problems with focus i currently have with the t3i aren't like focus being on a jersey instead of a face/eye, but more focus being on trees 100ft behind my subject. the t3i focuses on whatever is dead center in the frame, period, and it can be challenging to frame the action in that way.

so i'm really hoping for something that can shoot high fps, while accurately tracking a moving subject, that may not always be dead center in the frame, without me having to tell the camera exactly where that subject will be in advance, all while improving on the low light/high iso performance compared to my t3i. if it also is compatible with my current zoom lens and planned f2.8 upgrade lens, even better.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #30 of 31 Old 08-25-2019, 09:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
P&Struefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 402 Post(s)
Liked: 141
Don't know much about stills I'm sorry. I hardly take them nowadays and on certain cameras, never. But for video the Sony A6400, A6500 and a few Canons I mentioned previously, all working very well in practice in AF mode regardless of the specsheets.
P&Struefan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Camcorders

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off