if you have a canon eos r
Dec 12, 2019 15:20:06 #
The only downsides I have found with the EOS-R for action are; slight shutter lag and rolling shutter effect in the silent mode.
For low light use, it is near impossible at times to obtain autofocus. I sometimes have to actuate the autofocus multiple times with BBF to obtain focus. Which, will at times results with a missed shot. The good thing is, if I manual focus within a close range of the subject, it will than lock on much faster.
I love my EOS-R!
For low light use, it is near impossible at times to obtain autofocus. I sometimes have to actuate the autofocus multiple times with BBF to obtain focus. Which, will at times results with a missed shot. The good thing is, if I manual focus within a close range of the subject, it will than lock on much faster.
I love my EOS-R!
Dec 13, 2019 17:52:20 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Resqu2 wrote:
Done any action shots with your R? I have read that it’s not really recommended for this but I want real world experience as I was told the Canon 6D was awful for action and I totally disagree. I’m getting into more race photography (People running) and won’t consider it if it’s not good for this.
While any camera can be used for sports photography, some are simply better for the purpose than others.
If you have a wheelbarrow full of money, the $5500 1DX Mark II (20MP) is #1 Canon choice, so long as you can also invest in $9000 and $11,000 lenses that are needed with a full frame camera such as this, are willing to hire an assistant to help you carry your kit around and/or have a golf cart to get from one location to the next.
But if you aren't made of money and don't have help and will be slogging around with your gear, a Canon 7D Mark II (20MP) should be very near the top of a sports shooter's shopping list. APS-C, it can "get the same reach" with much more practical and affordable lenses like the $1350 EF 300mm f/4 or the $2000 EF 100-400mm II.
Both the 7DII and 1DXII have significantly faster continuous frame rates than the EOS R, get far more shots per battery charge than the mirrorless, and have optical viewfinders that are still widely preferred over EVFs for sports shooting.
Third choice would be the new Canon 90D... Same frame rate as the 7DII, face/object tracking, but not quite as good AF system and, if it were me, for sports shooting I'd probably dial it down from it's full 32.5MP. That's much larger than needed for most sports photography and will just fill up memory cards and hard drives faster, might even slow down post-processing. The older 80D (24MP) wouldn't be a bad choice either, similar AF system. And both are APS-C models.
5DIV, 6DII, 5DIII and the original 6D all can be used for sports photography (and are top choices for some other things, such as low light shooting, portraiture, landscape/architecture, maybe even macro)... but they are less ideal for sports action shooting than the above models. For example, the original 6D (20MP) you mention is particularly good for low light, but it's 11-point AF system only has a single high performance point at the center (versus 61 points in the 1DX or 5D series cameras, 65 points in the 7DII, or 45 points in the 80D, 90D and 6DII... all or most points the higher performance dual axis type in those models). The 6D's ten peripheral AF points are fine for some things... But very fast focus acquisition and tracking ability that sports demands aren't among them.
Canon is supposedly working on future R-series models right now.... and among those is supposedly a sports model. But they are expected to instead release a 1DX Mark III (still 20MP) before the Summer Olympics next year. It remains to be seen how they will handle some of the EVF/sports issues. Plus they really don't have anywhere near "long enough" RF lenses for a full frame sports shooters. Rumors are that we'll see an "ultra high resolution" mirrorless replacement for the 5Ds/5Ds-R in the R-series long before we see a high speed sports variant. Not that mirrorless including the EOS R and RP can't be used for sports too... They can. But just aren't ideal for the purpose.
Dec 13, 2019 18:02:03 #
Resqu2
Loc: SW Va
amfoto1 wrote:
While any camera can be used for sports photograph... (show quote)
Thank you, very good info here. I do have a 5D iv and I been using my 70-200 f/2.8 lens which is working ok. I think I really just need lots more practice as I sure don’t have a wheelbarrow load of money for sure. When I refer to sports I’m just talking about local 5k races so I don’t need and couldn’t use the big dollar lens you refer to but if I had a ton of money I’d sure have them. I think I have read enough here and everywhere else to decide to just hold on to my 5D iv and try to get in a lot more practice with it. I do fine with things that are not moving so I’m off to find things to practice on. Thanks again.
Dec 13, 2019 19:46:09 #
you can put a 1.4 or a 2x extender on your 70-200. by the way canon just dropped the price on the 5d mark 4 and on the eos R.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.