advertisement


Sports photography with 1DX 300mm 2.8L IS combo

M

mjhill1234

pfm Member
Afternoon all, middle of last year I dusted off my Canon 6D MK1 that I originally purchased new to capture an exotic holiday then stopped using. I have been using it to take pictures at my sons football matches with a 70-200mm F2.8L (non-IS) which I have been happy with but there are a couple of niggles. 1) both my camera and lens is absolutely mint so the moment there is a slight mist of rain I pack away or most times not even bother to take the camera and 2) I sometimes wish I had a little extra reach to avoid too much cropping 3) The AF could be a little snappier.

I am aware neither my lens or camera is weather sealed and am leaning towards investing in a well used 1DX and either a 300m 2.8 or possibly "upgrade" the 70-200mm to the IS version purely for the weather sealing.

I can't afford both at the same time and not sure if to start with the lens first or the 1DX. I am assuming the autofocus on the 1DX MK1 is well ahead of the 6D MK1 so I would see benefits from this. So I guess the question is will the 1DX with my 70-200 get a better result for sports photography than my 6D with a 300mm 2.8 :)

Reason behind the 1DX is purely as there are many about that have been heavily used at a low price (and with warranty depending on where its from).

Any advice gratefully received!
 
I have both , 1Dx and 300 2.8 , Its good but heavy , best minimum on a decent monopod or better still a decent tripod
 
AudioAl said:
I have both , 1Dx and 300 2.8 , Its good but heavy , best minimum on a decent monopod or better still a decent tripod
Click to expand...

Thank you. I have a basic manfrotto monopod (element I think) that has served me well. Maybe not man enough for the heavier rig mind.
 
The 1 series bodies are awesome, especially when using a long lens. I would personally avoid the heavily used ex-pro cameras and pay a bit more for a lightly used camera owned by an amateur.
 
My 1DX only has 34K , they are rated to 400.000 shutter activations , condition is very good , hardly any noticeable marks , you can find the shutter count in the menu options under ( the spanner icon )system status display , release cycles , It only shows in 1000's not 100's or 10's
 
I have a 1D IV. Great camera. Paid £400 and it is in very good condition. With the crop factor, a 70-200mm might do. Although I have always wanted a 300mm 2.8.
 
If you're worried about the weather, then just buy a couple of Optech rain sleeves. They work even in torrential rain and they are cheap as chips.

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/optec...t7i2t9ZlmdYPbW3iITmuC7ixFctYk4RUaArvnEALw_wcB

A 300/2.8 lens is big and heavy. It is hand holdable, but you would find a monopod really beneficial. The question you need to ask yourself is how much kit are you prepared to carry. You would need a large backpack or roller case to cart this around. It might possibly fit into a large shoulder bag or Billingham.
If I had to choose between a top piece of glass and another body, I would buy the lens. The glass is the key to a camera system. Digital bodies are essentially disposable items (in the nicest possible way - as digital upgrades occur frequently and digital cameras are more difficult to repair). If the 6D gives you an image quality you're happy with, just keep shooting with it. My 15 year old 10 MP Leica R9/DMR digital back still gives stunning pics and I still use it from time to time.
 
Thank you for all the advice. Never come across those low price rain sleeves before… only seen a posh Canon cover :)
 
I'd also question if you really need f/2.8, you may find that the f/4 equivalents give you a narrow enough DOF, and given how great the high ISO performance is these days, you can get decent results without the weight and expense.

A quick look at Ffordes shows the 1Dx coming in around £1k, with a 300/4 IS coming in around £600 compared to £2k+ for the 300/2.8 IS.

I'd definitely go with a 300/4 IS first, see how you go, then decide whether you are missing shots due to dodgy AF. You may have unrealistic expectations for better AF, or technique problems causing mis-focus.

As has been suggested, one of the older 1D bodies could also provide a decent experience when shooting sports. I have a 1D II which is very long in the tooth these days, but worked really well back in the day for this sort of thing. I'd also got a 1Ds II which is their 'studio' version, which is also very good out and about, just has a slower peak rate.

Oh, and i'd shoot in anything short of proper rain with your 6D, but that's just me, i think of cameras as tools and if it fails, well, that's just life, and the non-weather sealed bodies like that still have what would previously be considered sealing (so things like the Eos 3 didn't have weather seals but canon sold it as weather resistant for example).
 
I have owned 2 x 1Dx and a 1Dx Mk II. The autofocus is considerably better than the 6D (which I owned very briefly in a kit to get a 24-105 at a silly price) and the weather sealing is spot on.
1Dx bodies are amazing and virtually bombproof!
You really don't need f2.8 with these, f4 is easily good enough, especially with IS. Also consider the 3rd party Tamron G2 150-600 and Sigma equivalent. Remarkably good lenses with good IS
 
The 300 f4 has thrown a spanner in the works and after an early morning read, I can’t seem to find a bad word said about it apart from the lack of rubber gasket at the lens mount. I’ve seen a few 2.8 IS around which are cosmetically battered, most claim to have non “image impacting” internal dust and damage to the front element coating and “minor” scratches. Also mainly missing the hood. So if I compare this to a mint f4 there’s not a huge deal in it price wise.

So I’m seeing the only two main advantages (in my use case) the 2.8 has over the 4 is the weather sealing gasket on the mount and the fact I can shoot at a lower ISO with my football action shots. Higher ISO levels I am assuming is not a problem with the 1DX (not that I will need to go that high anyway).

I think two things are holding me back, first being the “would this image have looked better if I had the 2.8” effect and that unexpected “fine rain” which would cause me to put my gear away.

Or maybe I should get the 300mm f4 and sell my 70-200 2.8 to upgrade to the IS version for weather sealing. Then use the 1DX 70-200 IS combo when there is a light drizzle and the rain cover when it’s very wet, and the 300mm f4 in the dry for that extra reach I want.

Never simple is it! :eek:
 
A 300/4 is narrower depth of field than a 200/2.8 at the same focus distance.

Back in the day, Canon AF didn't work as well with f/4 lenses as f/2.8, so there was an auto-focus reason to get an f/2.8 lens, even if you were shooting stopped down to f/4. These days those restrictions aren't the same, so I don't believe there is a good reason to put up with the extra weight and cost *unless* you need to shoot at f/2.8.

Actually, the f/4 lenses have lighter moving elements, so in theory the focus is faster than the f/2.8 equivalents. Also, if you did pick up a battered f/2.8 version, it is likely to be the older mark I not the mark II version of the lens, so be careful when reading reviews. Also check the size comparison, these are very different lenses in the hand if you know what I mean. The 300/4 comes with a built in lens hood that is extended out, which is one less thing to loose :)

As for weather sealing, yes, the 300/4 has a compromise there, but the fact that canon have had to do this to scupper the lens to some degree suggests they were worried it would get used instead of the f/2.8 version. Let's face it, a rubber seal on the lens mount hasn't been removed to reduce cost, it's a marketing exercise to ensure it's positioned differently to it's much more expensive f/2.8 version.

BTW, I have the 70-200/4 IS that when it was originally launched had better image quality than the original 70-200/2.8 IS. This only changed with the updated II version, I think they've got a III now? Anyhow, you see the point, lenses are improved, the lower spec ones might exceed the performance of the older higher spec ones, so be careful when considering older lenses and make sure you know what you are buying.
 
Perhaps you can consider renting a couple of the lenses to see how you get on with them?
Look at www.lensesforhire.co.uk
No affiliation but I have used them regularly over the past few years and highly recommend them. They have 1Dx too but not cheap to rent.
 
May help if you fill in your profile as to what town you live in ?
If local to me you can meet up and have a go with my kit
 
AudioAl said:
May help if you fill in your profile as to what town you live in ?
If local to me you can meet up and have a go with my kit
Click to expand...
Done :) Near Bicester, Oxfordshire which looking at it is a fair distance from you! But a very kind gesture thank you for the offer.
 
I would suggest an alternative approach. Buy a s/h EOS 7D Mk2, which is an APS-C camera optimised for action photography, Being APS-C, your current 70-200mm lens will have an effective reach of a 320mm lens on the 1Dx. The 7Dii has a single dual cross-type centre AF point that gives faster AF with f2.8 lenses, so sticking with your current lens will be better in that respect than going for the 300mm f4 on the 1Dx. For sure, the 1Dx has more dual cross-type points, but one is better than none! This article is a useful comparison of the AF system with the 1Dx.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/comparisons/canon-eos-7d-ii-1d-x-5d-iii-af-comparison.aspx

You should be able to pick up a near-mint 7D2 with low shutter count and long warranty for no more than £620. For example try WEX, who offer 12 month warranty. You just need to keep a check on the stock as it comes in a grab a nice one when it appears. Good ones sell quickly. This one from LCE looks good value at £550 in the sale though there is an obvious mark on the back LCD

https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Canon-7D-Mk2-Body_321550.html

If you want to upgrade the lens, the 70-200mm f2.8 L IS Mk2 lens is supposed to be a much better lens than the non-IS you have (and the Mk1 IS). The 70-200mm f2.8 L IS Mk3 is however reportedly not much of an improvement over the Mk2 and so a s/h Mk2 is something of a bargain. A near mint example with warranty from a dealer should be possible for £1000 (I bought one last year for that, boxed and like new from LCE).

The 7D2 and 70-200mm L IS Mk2 is a great combo!

Online reviews would suggest the 300mm f4 L IS is not in the same league in terms of sharpness as either the Mk1 or Mk2 f2.8 L IS lenses (both of which are legendary for sharpness). I have toyed with buying a ‘well used’ Mk1 f2.8 (that being what I could afford), but the weight of the thing puts me off. I found the 70-200mm f2.8 to be about the limit of what I can hand hold all day. I use this for motorsports and find the freedom of movement from hand-holding a big plus, so I prefer not to use a monopod or tripod. I am often doing almost 180° sweeps, which gets awkward with a support, but maybe that is not required for football.

Please note, I wouldn’t buy a 300mm f2.8 (Mk1 or Mk2) without the hood. They are made from carbon fibre and are extremely expensive to replace (>£150).

If you want longer than 200mm, the 1.4x Extender Mk3 is worth a look. I have one for my 70-200mm but haven’t used it for anything serous yet. For sure you lose a bit of sharpness but is seems to be quite a small effect. You lose the f2.8 advantage of course. The Mk3 extender is supposed to be noticeably better than the earlier versions and is the one to go for. Should be about £300 to £320, s/h. They are a bit more expensive than the 2x extenders.

I also have the 70-300mm L IS lens. This is only f5.6 at the long end and, whilst not super-sharp, is more than sharp enough for action photography (IMHO). The big advantage is that it is very light in weight and so very easy to hand hold. Now discontinued but available s/h for under £800 s/h I would have thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top