Sports Shooting Options?

[thgmuffin]

I currently have the 6D and T2i! I really have been liking the center AF point on the 6D for sports as it is worlds ahead of my T2i. I have been using the 24-105 and really do not have any telephoto. I'm really stumped as it only has an F4 aperture and indoor sports such as volleyball require shutter speeds of 1/800 and above! Plus, outdoor football requires some sort of telephoto lens. (Kind of just getting stuff for my school's photoclub and yearbook)

Here are some of the options, and I would like your opinions:
6D+Tamron 70-200 V2
Second hand 7D (Getting to around $300-500 in my area! ) and Canon 70-200 MK I
6D+135mm F2 + 70-300 (Sigma's new one coming soon?) 135mm is a great focal length for all of my indoor sports, and 70-300 wouldn't be too bad for football as the field is really nicely lit
7D+85mm F1.8+70-300mm?

Thanks guys!

 

[ForumMuppet]

Initially I was going to suggest waiting for the 7DII to come out and drive the price of the 7D down a little. But if you can get it for $300-500 that is already pretty low. I just sold my 7D for $1000 last week. When you are looking at the 70-200 I, is that the f/2.8 or the f/4? If that is the f/2.8 I would suggest that package. If it is the f/4, I would say the 70-300. One thing you could also do is keep the 6D and put everything into a 70-200 f/2.8 II + a 1.4 TC III. The 6D can take the ISO up enough to get the shutter speeds you need for night sports without too much noise being introduced.

 

[thgmuffin]

Initially I was going to suggest waiting for the 7DII to come out and drive the price of the 7D down a little. But if you can get it for $300-500 that is already pretty low. I just sold my 7D for $1000 last week. When you are looking at the 70-200 I, is that the f/2.8 or the f/4? If that is the f/2.8 I would suggest that package. If it is the f/4, I would say the 70-300. One thing you could also do is keep the 6D and put everything into a 70-200 f/2.8 II + a 1.4 TC III. The 6D can take the ISO up enough to get the shutter speeds you need for night sports without too much noise being introduced.

The 70-200 F2.8 IS MK 1 is the one I'm looking at. Should I just consider this? Or should I wait and see if I can find a deal on the Tamron?

 

[thgmuffin]

Out of curiosity, would a 1D Mark II have better AF tracking then the 6D?

Because there's a guy selling one for $280.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/pho/4051333308.html

 

[paul13walnut5]

Idmark2's are getting on a bit now, and in those days for some reason it tended to be the pros who had the pro cameras, not like now where 1Dx's and 5D3's are probably mainly cherished by amateurs, the point being, a 1Dmk2 has the potential to have had a hard working life.

It's 'only' 8MP, but then you can still do a lot with 8MP.

High ISO will be poor compared to your 6D, but you will get a little extra reach.

I wouldn't buy one.

If you want good af tracking then a $500 7D sounds like a steal.

I can only vouch that it works great with my 70-200 f2.8L (non IS)

You'll probably still want to shoot at f4 or smaller, but your AF will really come to life.

 

[alexanderferdinand]

7D + 70-200/2.8 v1.
For sports I would prefer high FPS, and the buffersize gained size since this new FW came out.

 

[Skirball]

7D + 70-200/2.8 v1.
For sports I would prefer high FPS, and the buffersize gained size since this new FW came out.

If the 7D is in good shape getting one for $300 - 500 is a no-brainer.

Though you mention the 70 - 200 v.1. If it's for sports consider the non-IS and save a bit of cash.

 

[Don Haines]

If you can find a 7D for $300 - $500 Grab it. It will be a wonderful camera for outdoor sports and the crop sensor will get you a bit more reach out of your lenses.

For indoor sports, higher ISO performance makes your 6D the better camera... 5D3 or 1DX are even better, but at a much higher cost

How much are you willing to spend on a lens? If it is around the $1200 range, the 70-200F4 IS is incredible and gives sharp pictures on a crop camera, even with a 1.4x teleconverter. For an extra $1000 you can go to the F2.8 version and get similar sharpness but with better low light ability

 

[FTb-n]

For indoor sports, from figure skating to grade school basketball and volleyball, I was quite happy with my 7D and 70-200 f2.8L II. But, there were times in some gyms where lighting was a bit challenging and I often shot between ISO 2000 and 3200 to keep the shutter speed at 1/500 or better.

For figure skating, moving from a 60D to the 7D greatly improved my keeper rate because the 7D is much better at AI Servo in tracking moving skaters. On occasion, the 8 FPS is a nice benefit, but I don't rely on it as a substitute for timing the shot.

Then, I upgraded to the 5D3 and saw a great improvement in image quality at the higher ISO. With the 7D, I was always using noise reduction in post. With the 5D3, I rarely need it.

The 7D and 5D3 are similar in focusing performance. I shoot single-point expansion and do find that the 5D3 has an edge with its extra focus points. But, the in-focus keeper rate didn't improve like it did moving from the 60D to the 7D.

So, it all depends on the movement of your subjects. If AI Servo performance is a must and your 6D is having trouble tracking, then the 7D might be an improvement. I emphasize "might" because I don't know how the two compare in this regard.

If you're happy with the 6D focus performance with sports, then skip the 7D and get the 70-200 f2.8L II. The Mark II version of this lens is not only sharper, but reportedly focusses quicker than the Mark I version.

Regarding the extra reach of the 7D, it doesn't help indoors for sports. You will be using higher ISO and need to clean up the noise later. You will get cleaner images cropping in post with you 6D.

As for FPS, yes, the 8FPS of the 7D can catch shots that I would otherwise miss. But, more often than not, the first shot in the sequence is the one I want. But then, I'm not shooting professional athletes who would be faster and more challenging when timing some shots. You'll have to make the call regarding the value of this feature. Personally, the high ISO image quality trumps the higher FPS.