Which Canon body for sports using R lenses?

[ryee3]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have not been totally satisfied using my DMR and R lenses for taking sports photos. I have been waiting for the R solution but am ready to take the jump and get a non Leica digital solution. I like the Nikon bodies but don't like the Leitax solution. So I think I am going to go with a Canon solution. There are many options for using the Canon bodies. Which model is best for sports in low to mod lighting venues ie gyms etc. Maybe some things to consider are good color,iso, digital noise, full frame vs 1.3x, frames per second, pixel size, brightest viewfinder etc.... Anyone have the best model to suggest from their own experience?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[dickgrafixstop]

Pick a price point. My favorite is the 5DmkII - full frame, five frames/second, get the

high res focusing screen. Don't think there's twice the advantage to go twice as expensive with the 1DMk3 and prefer full frame over the 7d aps sensor. Focusing and

low light performance is pretty much the same. The R lens adapters work fine and

aside from being stuck with manual focus, its a good solution. I've tried the 80-200 zoom and the 350. Canon's a great choice and keeps getting better.

[ryee3]

Thanks for your thoughts. Is the 5D giving 5 fps? The Canon catalog is giving it only 3.9 fps. Where do you obtain the high resolution screen from Canon or a 3rd party seller? If its from Canon do you have a model number? How is the noise at the higher ISO. Its poor on the DMR at 1600.

[earleygallery]

The crop sensor models will extend the reach of your lenses of course, but whilst I like using my R lenses on a Canon body, having tried photographing a couple of sports events with it, I'm going to buy an AF zoom lens for it.

[Rona!d]

You should think about fast EF lenses and 7D which has a much better AF for sports than 5D. Low light performance is pretty good and APS works well in sports. You get 8 frames per second which covers most kind of sports activities. The 7D is a very good sports partner for my full frame Canons.

[svenning]

Dear ryee3,

You should stick to Canon's EF lenses if you shoot sport pictures.

Leica lenses on Canon EOS cameras is not the best combination for sports photography.

All the best Svenning, Denmark

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The OP is a troll who is simply moaning about the R issue.

 

If a person is serious about shooting sports in today's hugely competitive market, he had best fall back and accept long, autofocus lenses. Forget about R lenses on some other brand body.

 

Ignore the troll.

 

OP - Go to Sports Photography and Photojournalism for Professional Photographers and Photography | SportsShooter.com for more information regarding The Real Thing for sports. Your question will be answered by professionals in the field.

 

--

Pico - who lost one of his few best sportshooter friends recently.

[adan]

You want to see sports shot with a Canon 5D(1) and Leica R glass? Go here: ColoradoSeen - Back Issues

 

Scroll down to August issue and see story "Roll, Baby, Roll!" starting on pages 32-33. 180 and 250 lenses (and a couple of M9 shots as well)

 

The main ingredient in good sports photography is a photographer who knows the sport and can predict when and where the photographable moments will occur. Skill in this area cuts down on the need for AF and high frame rates.

 

Cropped bodies do "extend" the reach of lenses - of course, so does just cropping the final image after the fact. But part of good sports photography is being able to separate the subject from the background, and a short lens "cropped" can't do this as well as a lens that is long to begin with. I.E. a 180 f/2.8 shot on 1.6 Canon crop has the reach of a 280, but it doesn't blur the background as much as a 280 f/2.8 (or even a 280 f/4).

 

Out of the Canon stable, the obvious choice for sports is the 1D4 - 10 fps if you need it, moderate crop, less noise than the 7D (or 1D3). Sports is what it was designed for. (Nikon D3s does even better if one won't miss the 30% fewer pixels, but OP said no Leitax for him).

[stunsworth]

If a person is serious about shooting sports in today's hugely competitive market, he had best fall back and accept long, autofocus lenses. Forget about R lenses on some other brand body.

 

Where did the OP say that he was a professional?

 

For what it's worth I used a Canon 5D with exclusively Leica lenses for a couple of years without feeling the need to use AF.

[pico]

Where did the OP say that he was a professional?

 

For what it's worth I used a Canon 5D with exclusively Leica lenses for a couple of years without feeling the need to use AF.

 

Were you shooting under a deadline for publication, or just for yourself?

[stunsworth]

Were you shooting under a deadline for publication, or just for yourself?

 

For myself - as I suspect the original poster is as well.

[pico]

For myself - as I suspect the original poster is as well.

 

I stand corrected. Thanks for that.

 

My response was prejudiced through my professional sports photography, with which I struggled until I did the world a favor and stopped doing it.

 

--

Pico - Surf for my friends who humbled me into leaving sports photography, Mickey Pfleger (RIP) and Hal Stoelzle (Pulitzer).

[iShutterbug]

... There are many options for using the Canon bodies. Which model is best for sports in low to mod lighting venues ie gyms etc. Maybe some things to consider are good color,iso, digital noise, full frame vs 1.3x, frames per second, pixel size, brightest viewfinder etc.... Anyone have the best model to suggest from their own experience?

 

Here are some low-light shots with Canon 5DmkII at ISO 2500, handheld, on 'auto'. Very high percentage of keepers, pretty hard to beat.

The Nutcracker