You said sports. The 80D has better low light capability (1100 ISO compared to 950 for T6i) and has a burst speed of 7 FPS compared to 6 FPS. In sports that makes a difference. I would definitely take the 80 D over the 77D.

Here are a couple from grandkids teams. YAFL and high school BB. Not the Cowboys for sure, but definitely low light.

(Download)


(Download)

You are right. Didn't notice the lens and equipment, but going back and reading the OP, he didn't ask about equipment anyway, but about legal issues and experiences rather than what equipment to use.

Guess some of us jumped the gun on equipment advise. OOPS!

Bill

Don't know why you would give this kind of advise other than the fact that you are a "Nikon fan boy". According to DXOMark the D500 (ISO 1324) has slightly less low light performance than the D7200 (ISO 1333) and they are only slightly better than the Canon 80D (ISO 1135) or the 7d MkII (ISO 1082). None of these are really low light queens. The Canon 5D mk IV at ISO 2995 is slightly better than the Nikon 810 (ISO 2853) or the D750 (ISO 2956). In fact, the Canon 6d MkII has a better ISO rating (2862) than the D810. The Nikon D3s that you recommended is ISO 3253 which is no better than the Canon 1DXMkII at ISO 3207 and ahead of the Nikon D4s at ISO 3074.

The only thing you are really right about is the Sony is better than all the rest for low light, but in reality any of the top tier cameras from Canon, Nikon or Sony will give professional results with the proper lenses, and in most cases the Sony lenses are more expensive with not as many choices. Something to consider when developing a system. So why give advise that is less than accurate just because you shoot Nikon?

Bill

I shoot because I enjoy it and if the camera wears out, I will get a new one. I give away the pics because they are mostly of my grand kids and their friends. If professionals are creating images that are "professional quality" and better than mine, there is no reason why people won't buy them.

By your way of thinking, if someone shoots for personal satisfaction and shares their work with others they are taking away from the professional. If that is the case, then we need to put up our cell phones, point and shoots, and bridge cameras and just leave the shooting to the pros.

Bill

I do the international fiesta in Albuquerque every year. Leave your tripod at home. Mono pod might be okay. You don't need real high shutter speeds, the balloons are not fast. I usually shoot manual with a shutter around 1/60 to 1/125 and an f stop that will give the depth of field that I want, then leave the camera in auto ISO with a limit of about 3200.

#1 is pre-dawn very low light with lasers in the background f4, 1/20sec, ISO 6400. #2 daylight f16 1/125 sec. ISO 400. #2 sunrise f22 1/125sec. ISO 400.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

I shoot school sports all the time and have had no problems. Football games I just ask a coach of ref for sideline access, basketball I have shot from under the basket, sidelines, etc. Most baseball and softball fields where I shoot have a box chalked out on the ground inside the fence on the 3rd base and 1st base lines just for photographers.

You will need fast glass and a camera with high ISO capability to get the best images possible, and be mindful of flying objects and people. I was shooting a softball game at my granddaughter's school from the 3rd base line and took line drive fowl to the shin that cracked the bone. Softballs are NOT.

Bill

Had no intention of arguing with anyone. Just trying to get clear on what was happening. Bill_de gave me the answer I was looking for. Thanks.

Bill

Guess it was my mistake by including the pics in the first post. Thanks for the info.

Bill

Recently I have posted shots concerning the performance of a piece of equipment in the main photo discussion area only to have the thread moved to the gallery. I did not post these pics for the content of the photo, but rather to address the ability of the lens in question. I would think that a lens review with examples would be appropriate for the Main Discussion section, and would get more air time and benefit more members than being in the gallery. I see pics all the time in Main Discussion that address various equipment or techniques that have not been moved. Inquiring minds want to know.

Bill

Used the new 18-135 Sony E lens on an A6000 exclusively on a recent trip to San Diego. It was mostly gloomy and overcast, but I found that the lens performed very well for a middle of the road all around lens. I am attaching some examples of what the lens will do. Nothing special, but not lousy either.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

I have decided that I don't need the big camera for most travel, especially if there is an airplane involved. I am going to try my Sony a6000 with an 18-135 3.5-5.6 and a 55-210 kit lens for an upcoming trip to San Diego and see if it covers my needs. I even have a small tripod for it that fits in a carry-on bag. It's not a great tripod, so that might be the weak link.

Bill

Thanks for all the replies. Have some ideas now to narrow down into the free time that I will have. Already have reservations for the Midway.

Bill

Going to my nephew's USMC graduation next week and will have a day to tour and shoot before the festivities. Any must see/must do's??

I have used some of the less expensive (Cheap) filter kits and found them very lacking. Lots of color cast on most of them. I finally "bit the bullet" and purchased a Lee kit with some graduated and solid ND filters. These are much better quality, but they are pricey.

Breakthrough is a very good filter and has almost zero color cast, but they do not offer much in the way of square filters that you will need for graduated work, and they are not cheap.