Shot football game with 1DX and 1D4

[bdunbar79]

Results tomorrow. Preliminarily the 1DX focused faster, more accurately, and went to way higher iso's. The 1D4 was great with extended reach on the 70-200L. I'll have photos tomorrow night. I definitely would like a second 1DX body to keep with me, and use that on the 70-200L instead. Oh man the ISO performance!!

 

[bdunbar79]

Just a real quick ISO 25,600 picture, with minimal processing. I dowloaded off CF card, cropped, applied 50% NR. This camera is absolutely insane and I think I am beginning to finally realize it's potential as a low-light sports camera.

 

[brett b]

Awesome! I'm looking forward to seeing more of your images from this game and hearing your thoughts comparing the performance of each body.

I've been following your threads with interest as you get to know your 1DX. I really appreciate that you've taken the time to share with this forum. Thank you.

I shoot a lot of live theater. The theaters use my images for media/PR/advertising via newspaper, web, posters, billboards, etc. For this I've been using a 1DIV for 2 1/2 years. I've been satisfied with the AF and IQ and my clients are happy. I know I'll be buying the 1DX next month and feel it will be an improvement (I can use the higher ISO performance and better AF), but I think I'm going to miss the reach of the 1DIV. I'm often shooting stages that are very dimly lit and I'm a bit concerned about the black focus points. However, for theater, I shoot in one shot not AI servo. My understanding is that in one shot the focus points still light red. Is this correct?

I also do headshots for actors/singers/dancers and I shoot architecture (mainly interiors). For these I use a 1DsIII. I'm a little concerned about going from 21 to 18 megapixels and I haven't seen much discussion comparing IQ between the 1DX & the 1DsIII. What are your thoughts?

Do you think the 1DX can replace my 1DIV & 1DsIII given that the above is my bread and butter?

Any thoughts would be appreciated!

 

[charlesa]

Impressive, I love this camera. Although yesterday was trying some long exposure work and got quite disappointed with the noise that started appearing in the shadow areas...

 

[bdunbar79]

Awesome! I'm looking forward to seeing more of your images from this game and hearing your thoughts comparing the performance of each body.

I've been following your threads with interest as you get to know your 1DX. I really appreciate that you've taken the time to share with this forum. Thank you.

I shoot a lot of live theater. The theaters use my images for media/PR/advertising via newspaper, web, posters, billboards, etc. For this I've been using a 1DIV for 2 1/2 years. I've been satisfied with the AF and IQ and my clients are happy. I know I'll be buying the 1DX next month and feel it will be an improvement (I can use the higher ISO performance and better AF), but I think I'm going to miss the reach of the 1DIV. I'm often shooting stages that are very dimly lit and I'm a bit concerned about the black focus points. However, for theater, I shoot in one shot not AI servo. My understanding is that in one shot the focus points still light red. Is this correct?

I also do headshots for actors/singers/dancers and I shoot architecture (mainly interiors). For these I use a 1DsIII. I'm a little concerned about going from 21 to 18 megapixels and I haven't seen much discussion comparing IQ between the 1DX & the 1DsIII. What are your thoughts?

Do you think the 1DX can replace my 1DIV & 1DsIII given that the above is my bread and butter?

Any thoughts would be appreciated!

To answer your question very briefly, yes, the 1DX has better IQ than both the 1D4 and 1Ds3, especially above ISO 800. You will realize that if you use it. As far as the focus points, I have not seen red focus points in either AI Servo or one shot. They're black. That is a downside for sure. If you shoot at ISO 6400 and below, it's hard to give up the reach on the 1D4 I agree, but objectively at all ISO's I have realized higher IQ than both the 1D4 and 1Ds3. I sold my 1Ds3 right away after I got the 1DX. I have still kept onto my 1D4 for the reach, but if I can sell it, it's going too, and I will shoot with 2 of the 1DX's. At 18mp, the detail is very sharp and even though the 5D3 has 22mp, you can get the 1DX's 18mp images to be sharper. It's quite amazing.

 

[bdunbar79]

Bear with me on the uploading of the photos. It was more than just the game, they had a bunch of halftime crap I had to shoot. I'm working on them.

 

[bdunbar79]

Straight out of the cam (NO editing whatsoever) 4-shot burst from the football game with the 1DX. I did a 4, 6, 8, and 14 shot bursts at some point during the game. I'll have those later.

Just trying to present these tests as quickly as possible. As always, RAW's available upon request.

 

[gary samples]

Straight out of the cam (NO editing whatsoever) 4-shot burst from the football game with the 1DX. I did a 4, 6, 8, and 14 shot bursts at some point during the game. I'll have those later.

Just trying to present these tests as quickly as possible. As always, RAW's available upon request.

Sweet burst the iso is wonderful clean

 

[bdunbar79]

Thanks. That was the first burst I did. Later on in the game, I figured out I could fill in the gaps, and get the foot connecting with the ball, etc. That thing is awesome when it's shooting like a machine gun. Everybody stares at you though

 

[Skulker]

Just a real quick ISO 25,600 picture, with minimal processing. I dowloaded off CF card, cropped, applied 50% NR. This camera is absolutely insane and I think I am beginning to finally realize it's potential as a low-light sports camera.

An amazing shot, increadable ISO used to capture an action shot.

 

[bdunbar79]

Thanks. Here's a huge crop down to 2.4 MP. Check out the detail retained. (Granted it is not FRAMED correctly in ACR, but I'm still working that out )

 

[bdunbar79]

One more ISO 25,600 to share:

 

[nikkito]

pretty cool pics, but hey, that's not Football!!! ;-)

this is football ;D

i did not take this pic, it was taken by:
Photo: Alejandro Pagni/AFP/Getty Images

 

[bdunbar79]

Oh crap, I forgot about that:

American football, or rather, "Merican football"

8)

 

[candyman]

pretty cool pics, but hey, that's not Football!!! ;-)

this is football ;D

+1

Excellent shot!
World Championship 2012?
With the 1D X?

 

[nikkito]

oh no. sorry, i did not take the shot, i linked it from the internet. it's from Photo: Alejandro Pagni/AFP/Getty Images

here's the link
http://www.google.ch/imgres?hl=de&safe=off&sa=X&biw=2560&bih=1306&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=03-azmIQYKtKCM:&imgrefurl=http://www.sikids.com/photos/13056/players-to-watch-in-world-cup-quals/2&imgurl=http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0910/wcq.players/images/lionel-messi.jpg&w=666&h=699&ei=3oZDUMmDKYrQ4QTDgoHQBg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=1567&vpy=261&dur=264&hovh=230&hovw=219&tx=119&ty=141&sig=114335695174818232442&page=1&tbnh=119&tbnw=113&start=0&ndsp=122&ved=1t:429,r:26,s:0,i:152

 

[nikkito]

Oh crap, I forgot about that:

American football, or rather, "Merican football"

8)

hahaha ;D

now again, nice pics dude

 

[Richard Lane]

One more ISO 25,600 to share:

Great Capture and nice clean pics and colors at 25,600. Very Impressive!

Nice throw into double coverage! Did the receiver make the completion?

I noticed that you're using the 300mm f/2.8L on the 1DX, do you find that long enough now, because I was comfortable with that lens on the 1DMKIV, but now I'm thinking of upgrading to the 400mm f/2.8L IS II or 500mm f/4L IS II for the FF 1DX. It looks like f/2.8 will still be nice to have for 1/1000sec and ISO 12,800 to 25,600.

What are your thoughts about this?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[bdunbar79]

Richard,

Thanks. That pass was actually tipped, and the AU (purprle jersey) #2 intercepted.

I did purchase the 400 lens for FF as well. If you don't have good sideline passes, the 300 will fall just a bit short. If I'm in a situation where I am back farther than where I would be now, I'd have no hesitation using 400mm. However, I thought for most shots on the sidelines, 300 was sufficient. Also, if you're at one end of the field, and need to shoot plays at the other end, again 400 is much better b/c I had to crop some of my photos too much b/c for this game I didn't bring my 400.

 

[Richard Lane]

I figured I didn't want to crop as much, especially at night with the added noise, however I can't believe how well the noise is controlled. I shoot from the sidelines too, mainly for High School.

I would actually like the 400mm f/2.8 II for Sports and 600mm f/4L II for Surfing and Birds, but I'm trying to avoid buying two lenses. So, I rented the 500mm f/4L IS II yesteday to see if that would meet my needs, however it seems a little long for football and a little short for Surfing and Birds on FF. I'm trying to avoid deciding based soley on the 1.4X.

The 500mm is nice for shooting down filed from the end-zone, as it produces such nice clean backgrounds, but if there is an interception, fumble, or long pass from the line of scrimmage than it's too long. I can switch to the MKIV 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II combo, but it's still too easy to miss shots while switching. I was also hoping that the 200-400mm would come out before I make my decision, but it also lacks f/2.8.

Edited: You also have to back up so much with the 500mm, I was shooting about 40-50yards away, so every time there was a change of possession, I was constantly walking back and forth along the sidelines.