|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/13/2007 09:29:47 AM · #1 |
'Urro,
It would appear that I insulted the gods of camera reliability in the thread about the 1DIII when I said I'd be OK if my 20D and old 1D kept on working fine...
My 20D has dropped it's shutter, and given the terrible service level out of Canon NZ I don't expect it back any time soon.
Anyway, can someone who has used both the 5D and 20D (or 30D) tell me if the center focus point 'assist' points seem to make much difference in tracking objects in servo focus mode? And is the accuracy of the focus with long/fast lenses good enough wide open to use for occasional sports usage? (i.e: 300/2.8 @ F/2.8)
I'm going to have to get another camera to fill the gap, as 4Mp isn't enough for some things I do. It'll probably be a 30D, but there are some good deals on the 5D at the mo, and if the focus performance is better than the 20D I could be very tempted. It'd delay my 1DIII purchase, but I need to keep shooting in the mean time, and full frame would be great for landscapes and portraits.
Cheers, Me. |
|
|
|
05/13/2007 09:37:31 AM · #2 |
First, let me state... I love my 5D. I love it for portraiture. For its low noise, high dynamic range. For its full size sensor and for lenses that work the way they were meant to work (again, for portraiture).
But it's definitely NOT a sports shooter. The frame rate is simply too slow. There is too much action that happens in between the shutter opens that gets missed.
So... while I've read that the 5D has a much more accurate focusing system in AI Servo mode than does the 20D, the few times that I've tried using it for sports, I've decided it just doesn't matter. I miss too many of the shots. So I use the 20D for sports and other fast action. And I use the 5D for portraiture and other slower moving subjects.
I do have the Mark III on order. I'm hoping for the best of both worlds. A better focusing system AND a faster frame rate. The Mark III should be a sport shooters dream come true. :-)
|
|
|
|
05/13/2007 10:46:48 AM · #3 |
| I agree with David, in most sports you don't need the 12.8 Mp of the 5D, nice but speed is more important. That is the draw back for the new Mark III, very fast at 10 fps but still only 10 Mp. It would have been a dream come true if it had a full size sensor like the 5D and the speed as advertised. |
|
|
|
05/13/2007 12:23:13 PM · #4 |
Why oh why must everyone say the 5D isn't a sports camera. I've been shooting the end of the Phoenix Suns season and the playoffs with a 5D as my farcourt and sometimes as a remote camera.
It's simply amazing. With a mk2, 5D and 20D at my disposal, I've left the 20D to do the remote work, because the 5D simply focuses better. That's not to say you can't get the shot with the 20D, but I trust my 5D more than my 20D and the mk2 more than the 5D.
I'll be honest, the frame rate isn't great, but if you are good at timing your shots, then you can get the shots more often than not. But trading in that frame rate, you get more megapixels (which are also bigger per pixel size), as well as better (thought not by a ton) noise reduction in camera, and finally, the focus is far and away better than the 20D.
I've shot boxing, basketball, and other professional level sporting events with the 5D, and noone's complaining.
btw, if you'd like to see samples:
//www.photoshelter.com/user/pshizzy
The first two feature images for those respective galleries are shot with a 5D. The Raja Bell on Manu Ginobili shot is a good example of good timing, not shooting through with the frame rate.
look at any of the games, the farcourt camera is the 5D, and you can tell by looking at the exif
Last note: I'm not knocking people who shoot through with the framerate. I do this a lot, but I also know how to shoot one shot at a time and work with the timing of the camera and the shot. To each their own.
Max |
|
|
|
05/14/2007 06:09:00 AM · #5 |
Thanks for the comments...
re: speed... I deliberately didn't ask about speed as I don't believe the speed of the camera will effect what I do as much as the focus accuracy.
I have lost more photos to focus accuracy with the 10 and 20D than response speed and frame rate combined. Certainly it's nice to be able to bash along at 8fps with the 1D, but I find that many of my better 'timed' shots are from single frames, not bursts.
Some times use the 1D and fire away like crazy, other times I'll take the 20D and be a bit more methodical. Seems that I get roughly the same number of 'keepers' from an event, regardles of how much surplus data I collect in the process.
I reckon that the more I shoot the better my timing gets, but the focus inacuracy with my 10D and 20D remains constant... Constantly annoyng that is.
BTW, these are all from the last few weeks and the 10D/70-200 combo.
     
Using the 1D for these particular shots would not have helped, pushing the button at the right time does it. And I don't get paid for wearing out cameras, I get paid for what is printed, so single shots is better for my bank balance!
Phamtom, what sort of sports are you thinking of that needs better than 10Mp? In the paper print media you're talking effectively 100dpi output, 150 with a tail wind. For photo prints the 8Mp images from the 20D can handle 17x11 if the silly thing actually got something in focus!
Anyway, thanks for the comments, I am really only interested in focus accuracy. That is the main reason I will get the new 1DIII when I have the funds. My 1D is starting to have issues, it's on the third shutter/mirror assembly, and was treated fairly poorly by a full time journo before I got it and started treating it poorly! :-). |
|
|
|
05/14/2007 07:52:38 AM · #6 |
The thing is ... I just really love sequence shots like this:
To me, they help to tell the whole story in a way that a single shot does not. In this case, the action must have been fairly slow because my 20D caught it.
But there are so many times that I try to get something like this and I'll see the soccer player crouching down / scrunching up / getting ready to "head the ball" in one frame, and in the very next frame (obviously only 1/5th of a second later at the 5fps frame rate) I see the player up in the air and the ball is gone without ever having made it's appearance within one of my frames.
Soccer simply happens "that fast". At 5fps, the setup, execution and delivery can be over in between shots. For me, that's what the Mark III's frame rate will fix. I'll finally have sequence shots that I can sell. My partner, with his 8.5fps Mark II has been getting them for a long time but my lil 20D only sporadically does so. And the 5D would make it even harder.
I feel you DO have a point, however, in that if you are going for single shot perfection, it shouldn't matter whether you're shooting the 20D or the 5D or the Mark III. Perhaps I should work on that more as well.
Message edited by author 2007-05-14 08:18:37.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2007 09:02:13 AM · #7 |
That's what I said, 10pm for newpaper print is more than enough, heck 4 Mp in most cases is overkill as you stated. I was just saying a 10 fps at 13 Mp would make the camera great for sports as well as portrait hi def work. I as others here at DPC shoot for Pro Baseball, I love my 5D but I spend as much time with the 20D in my hands. The 5D does seem to focuc better, has a lot less noise especially in the dark areas and just has a sharper better contrast and color. For sharpness I find that in most cases a RAW from the 5D needs little or no extra sharpening during final processing. As David has shown, same goes with a baseball pitcher, the 5D gets the windup and the follow-through but with the 20D I can get several pics of the actual release of the ball. Both are great, both have different pluses, both can be used at almost anything.
.
KiwiChris asked:"Phamtom, what sort of sports are you thinking of that needs better than 10Mp? In the paper print media you're talking effectively 100dpi output, 150 with a tail wind. For photo prints the 8Mp images from the 20D can handle 17x11 if the silly thing actually got something in focus!" |
|
|
|
05/15/2007 06:17:49 AM · #8 |
Hurro..
Sorry Phantom, I got the 'Still only 10Mp' bit and my brain missed the first part of the sentance.
And yeah, sequence shots can be cool, but I should confess that I'm not a sports-head as such.
If I weren't doing stuff for the paper, I'd not even know what sports are played locally, let or loan the names of most of the coaches and many of the team members!
It's growing on me, but working for a weekly paper as a solo freelancer means it's pretty slow going in terms of getting exposure and access to larger events that would expand my experience and skills. I've got a reasonable portfolio now, and hundreds of good tear sheets (And some terrible ones...) but I consider that I'm still learning the craft.
But enough about me :-). Thanks for the info on the 5D, I'll take a serious look at it now, and see how the finance will stack up...
Cheers, Me. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 05/09/2025 09:19:35 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/09/2025 09:19:35 AM EDT.
|
