Dslr advice wanted!

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

I'm usually providing advice on camera gear but this one is a bit outside of my wheelhouse...

I've been asked to take some sports photos of a dog for family. I'd love to do this. It'll be a challenge (it's a very fast cockapoo and the goal is a jumping photo with ears splayed out to the sides!) but it's something I'll really enjoy. I already have a plan for the shot - a 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 and a camera with decent continuous af and burst rate.

However I don't want to sell my Panasonic S5. I love that, the photos are great, it handles great. It has CRAP continuous AF. I can't afford the much better S5ii. So I'm thinking of an older dslr and lens - maybe a Canon 7D or a nikon D7000/D7100/D7200.

Has anyone done any fast autofocus work in the past on an older system and can recommend a set up? I think a 7D and an older 70-200mm is probably a good way to go. The distances are fairly short, up to 15m away, so having f/2.8 is less important than it otherwise may be. Key points I care about are fast, accurate tracking AF and reasonable sharpness for the lens, and fast AF and decent burst on body. Do not care one bit about full frame, and aps-c will be cheaper and probably much better for what I'm trying to do.

Advice appreciated on both body and lens!! I'll be selling an olympus epl-7 and much-loved Panasonic 20mm f1.7 mark ii to fund it. I'll probably do the shoot, immediately sell the gear and buy back the olympus and Panasonic, unless there is an affordable 35mm or 40mm lens for the Panasonic s5 by then...

stickyfiddle · September 2023

I haven't used them and sport isn't my thing but I'm well aware the 7D was the king of this stuff for a long time.

Could you rent?

Rustylee · September 2023

I used a 7D Mk 2 for motorcycle racing for a few years, never let me down

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

Renting is an option - a 7dii and 70-200mm 2.8 mark ii is about £150 for 3 days. But by buying and selling, it's effectively free and I'm not going to be printing bigger than, say, A3, so there is little to be gained from better kit.

It is an option, but if I can spend £250 buying, then sell for £250 it's effectively £150 less than renting. A 7D looks like about £100 or less, and the original 70-200mm f4 looks like it can be under £200 if I'm careful so that would work. Don't need IS as it's going to be tracking.

I'm not charging for the shoot, it's just for family. If I was charging I'd hire and pass on the cost.

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

I suppose a question is whether there is a more affordable/budget camera that offers similar af and burst to cameras like the 7d. Probably not, tbh...

goldtop · September 2023

For one shoot!

Do you really need fast AF? What about pre-focusing, pre-planned DoF and burst mode from tripod with cable release?

Something like this guy does:

https://petapixel.com/2022/01/31/photographer-captures-dogs-jumping-over-branches/

Easier to compose the shot and be assured of good subject/background separation that totting a big lens and spray+pray AF shooting.

boogieman · September 2023

I’d go for pre-focusing too. A dog walking mate has a spaniel and she is an incredibly fast mover, I doubt even the best autofocus would keep up.

Tannin · September 2023

The 7D was a humdinger of a camera. It was designed specifically for high speed use with excellent handling, very high build quality, 10 frames per second and an advanced AF system to match. Sport and wildlife were the target markets and it suited them very well.

The 7D came out immediately after Canon's disaster with the big pro model 1D III. The 1D III had a subtle but serious flaw in the AF system and Canon lost a huge amount of face over it. So the 7D Mark 1 absolutely HAD to be right to rescue their reputation. And it was. Indeed, Canon's subsequent AF systems in their better cameras right up to the 5D IV all have AF systems that follow in the 7D's footsteps. (The pro model Canons - 1D IV, 1DX and so on use a different system.)

The one and only significant issue with the 7D is high ISO noise. At 400 ISO it is great, but once you push past there it doesn't come close to more recent cameras (such as the 7DII). These issues are less pressing than they were back in the day because modern raw converts are much, much better than the ones we had back when the 7D was new. DxO's extraordinary twins PhotoLab and PureRAW set the nose-handling bar very high, but other converters are also much improved these days.

If you are working with half-decent light, a 7D Mark 1 is very close to just as good as any late-model SLR (such as a 7D II).

Almost all SLRs focus better with faster lenses. F/2.8 is good to have even when you are shooting at (say) f/8 because it allows the camera to use the faster, higher-precision AF points. Against that, different lenses AF at different rates. Some are famous for fast AF (the old 400/5.6 prime is an example, as are all of the big white ones - 500/4s and suchlike), some are notorious for slow AF (e.g., the 85/1.2). I'm not familiar with the 70-200s - it's never been a length I've used, all my stuff is either wide and normal length or long (100-400, 600/4), but it should be easy enough to find that out once you have a particular lens in mind.

PS: if I had that job to do I'd probably reach for my ancient 1D IV or the 7D II, though I might decide to accept half the frame rate and use the 5D IV anyway.

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

goldtop said:

For one shoot!

Do you really need fast AF? What about pre-focusing, pre-planned DoF and burst mode from tripod with cable release?

Something like this guy does:

https://petapixel.com/2022/01/31/photographer-captures-dogs-jumping-over-branches/

Easier to compose the shot and be assured of good subject/background separation that totting a big lens and spray+pray AF shooting.

That is a fantastic idea! I'll see if I can set this up. Longest lens I have is an 85mm for the Panasonic but with a decent burst I may manage. Composition is hard because the cockapoo is... Pretty stupid.

But saves me money and I like that!

RaymondLin · September 2023

One of the hardest thing for AF to do is a subject coming towards the camera, like wedding aisle shot and harder still, a running dog. You need a lot of distance between you and the subject and because the distance is closing down fast, you only get a second or 2 before they are too close to the frame. The further they are away, the deeper the DOF and the easier it is. The harder thing is dog’s faces are less flat than a human and the camera, without animal AI eye-af, tend to focus on the nearest thing which is their nose, and not the eye. You have to put the focus point in between their eyes.

I’ve not used the 7D, but most Canon DSLR’a Center focus point is the best one anyway, avoid using any of the outer ones and you should be able to do it with a few tries.

or you can do what goldtop suggest, pre-focus lock into a zone, and then as the dog runs through that zone you spray and pray.

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

@goldtop @boogieman thanks for advice. Remembered the s5 has a 6k burst mode - I can use the 85mm 1.8, set it to f2.8, prefocus and catch TONS of 18mp resolution, slightly cropped photos in a second. Fantastic! Money saved and tfb does it again. Cheers!

boogieman · September 2023

Btw, if the dog doesn’t have good recall or doesn’t like a particular treat or toy, then peanut butter is your friend. Haven’t found a dog yet that won’t look or run in a certain direction for a bit of peanut butter. Don’t give them too much though and only use the 100% natural stuff that doesn’t have sugar or sweetener added (especially xylitol, nasty stuff for dogs !)

dazzajl · September 2023

I would recommend a short telephoto and manual focus. A Cockapoo will run and chase a ball for hours on end, so it’s not a one take ‘do or die’ deal.

I’d pick a spot with a background you like, go for something around f8 and set the focus short of taking in the infinity point, so you soften the backdrop. Then you only need to worry about framing and timing as the dog runs at you. Success virtually guaranteed!

Haych · September 2023

Zone focus and use a suitable aperture to keep everything sharp. But I'm a nobody and know relatively nothing about photography despite everyone around me thinking I'm David bloody Bailey - I'm really not!

In any case, action photography isn't really my niche, so feel free to ignore my "advice".

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

To be honest, if I can't capture the moment at 85mm f/2.8 or f/4 at 60fps with 18mp I need to give up my camera. Should be trivial to be honest, i don't think I'll struggle. The tricky bit is actually finding a backdrop. It'll have to be in the garden, the dog has poor recall and she (bizarrely!) doesn't like going for walks, so the excitement is all in the garden with a ball.

joeW · September 2023

Look forward to the photos - don’t forget to post em here

rlw · September 2023

You could probably do it on an iPhone.
mine outperforms my 7D in most situations.

Tannin · September 2023

rlw said:

You could probably do it on an iPhone.
mine outperforms my 7D in most situations.

* Making telephone calls: tick
* Surfing the Internet: yep.
* Sending an email: for sure.
* Fitting in your pocket? definitely
* Chewing through batteries and going flat: for certain.
* Playing games: absolutely.
* Taking photographs: not a hope in hell.

Stratavarious · September 2023

I’d prefocus too at a log or other thing the dog is made to jump over chasing a ball or treat or if released to run to the owner.

guyinlyon · September 2023

ThePrettyDamned said:

I'm usually providing advice on camera gear but this one is a bit outside of my wheelhouse...

I've been asked to take some sports photos of a dog for family. I'd love to do this. It'll be a challenge (it's a very fast cockapoo and the goal is a jumping photo with ears splayed out to the sides!) but it's something I'll really enjoy. I already have a plan for the shot - a 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 and a camera with decent continuous af and burst rate.

However I don't want to sell my Panasonic S5. I love that, the photos are great, it handles great. It has CRAP continuous AF. I can't afford the much better S5ii. So I'm thinking of an older dslr and lens - maybe a Canon 7D or a nikon D7000/D7100/D7200.

Has anyone done any fast autofocus work in the past on an older system and can recommend a set up? I think a 7D and an older 70-200mm is probably a good way to go. The distances are fairly short, up to 15m away, so having f/2.8 is less important than it otherwise may be. Key points I care about are fast, accurate tracking AF and reasonable sharpness for the lens, and fast AF and decent burst on body. Do not care one bit about full frame, and aps-c will be cheaper and probably much better for what I'm trying to do.

Advice appreciated on both body and lens!! I'll be selling an olympus epl-7 and much-loved Panasonic 20mm f1.7 mark ii to fund it. I'll probably do the shoot, immediately sell the gear and buy back the olympus and Panasonic, unless there is an affordable 35mm or 40mm lens for the Panasonic s5 by then...

Does anyone rent pro gear where you are?

ThePrettyDamned · September 2023

Tannin said:

rlw said:

You could probably do it on an iPhone.
mine outperforms my 7D in most situations.

* Making telephone calls: tick
* Surfing the Internet: yep.
* Sending an email: for sure.
* Fitting in your pocket? definitely
* Chewing through batteries and going flat: for certain.
* Playing games: absolutely.
* Taking photographs: not a hope in hell.

My pixel certainly does a better job for low light than the full frame camera with f/1.8 lens - it's just the magic of computational photography.

I don't think it'll quite manage what I'm looking for here, though. It is true the pixel has exceeded my expectations and can produce a beautiful photo.

Kittyfrisk · September 2023

Tannin said:

rlw said:

You could probably do it on an iPhone.
mine outperforms my 7D in most situations.

* Making telephone calls: tick
* Surfing the Internet: yep.
* Sending an email: for sure.
* Fitting in your pocket? definitely
* Chewing through batteries and going flat: for certain.
* Playing games: absolutely.
* Taking photographs: not a hope in hell.

I'm giving @RaymondLin a shout here. I have seen some of his shots he has posted on here that were taken on an iPhone, that might just persuade you otherwise

Tannin · September 2023

ThePrettyDamned said:

Tannin said:

rlw said:

You could probably do it on an iPhone.
mine outperforms my 7D in most situations.

* Making telephone calls: tick
* Surfing the Internet: yep.
* Sending an email: for sure.
* Fitting in your pocket? definitely
* Chewing through batteries and going flat: for certain.
* Playing games: absolutely.
* Taking photographs: not a hope in hell.

My pixel certainly does a better job for low light than the full frame camera with f/1.8 lens - it's just the magic of computational photography.

I don't think it'll quite manage what I'm looking for here, though. It is true the pixel has exceeded my expectations and can produce a beautiful photo.

You mean the very modern software in your phone which massages the output of your low-fi phone sensor - and does it whether you like it or not - does a better job than whatever crappy old software you are using to process the output of the far superior sensor in your SLR? Yes, it does.

Now compare the two using similar-generation software and with similar levels of post-processing. The phone is, of course, miles behind. In the end, that's just physics. In low light, the one intractable issue is shot noise, and that is just physics. The ONLY way around it is a bigger, more efficient sensor ands a fast lens.

Rustylee · September 2023

When my 1DX starts receiving calls, I might take camera phones a bit more seriously

RaymondLin · September 2023

In terms of tech, phones are great, touch to focus, burst speed, face detect were all there before it was in cameras.

But in terms of pure IQ though, i still prefer my camera. I can take an okay photo with it and it looks good on a phone but when i look closer, the file kinda breaks down a bit.

boogieman · September 2023

Phone cameras have come on amazingly but they’re still nowhere near as good as a proper camera. Try printing off a phone camera shot at large size and you’ll soon see how noisy the image is. My iPhone is fine in decent light and I use it way more than my proper gear, but it’s terrible in low light.

Haych · September 2023

Phone cameras a brilliant for displaying a picture on a 6" screen - that's how most people use them and that's essentially how they're designed to be used.

The sensors on them are so small, though, that they are never going to deliver high IQ or give you depth of field without a software gimmick.

Megapixel count is irrelevant as the bigger the MP count the smaller each photosite in the sensor has to be. Image quality, signal to noise ratio and dynamic range are all going to suffer.

dazzajl · September 2023

Modern phones are the very best cameras ever made. For over 99% of all the images made every day, the difference between a good phone camera and anything else will range from negligible to indistinguishable. They are small, easy to use and most importantly, always with you when you need a camera.

I’d be very comfortable shooting this dog assignment on my phone, even if it wouldn’t be my first choice of kit. I’ve moved all of my personal camera kit on this year because the gains in use and IQ don’t match up to the faff of carrying it around.

To get any noticeable gain from using a phone you need an APS sensor at the very least and even then, you’ll only see the difference in large prints of lower light images.

The most important part of photography is still and will always be ‘to make images’. Whatever inspires you to shoot and have that camera with you all the time, is the right tool for you.

Tannin · September 2023

^ Just so @boogieman The reason is basic physics. Light comes in individual particles called photons. As you get down to either a very small sensor or a very low level of light - or worse both - the number of photons captured also becomes small. You always have random variations, but with very small photon numbers these have a disproportionate effect.

There is no way around this. No improvement in optics or sensor technology or hardware or software can do anything about it. The ONLY way to fix shot noise is to capture more photons. If you do this, the random variations become too small to notice. You capture more photons by (a) using a longer exposure, or (b) using a faster lens (which captures more light but is necessarily large, heavy, and expensive), or (c) using a larger sensor (for which you need something bigger than a phone), or (d) adding more light, typically by using flash.

There is also the usability and handling questions. Phones can't go anywhere near what an SLR can do in those regards. On the other hand, and SLR can't make calls and doesn't fit in your pocket. Different task, different tool.

boogieman · September 2023

I agree @Tannin. ;Phones are the modern day equivalent of having a Box Brownie on a cord round your neck compared to lugging around a full sized plate camera. They’re fine for convenience, plus the fact that you usually have one with you, but the downside is the IQ isn’t great. It’s a trade off that most people are willing to make.

hywelg · September 2023

Phone cameras take excellent photos for viewing on a phone screen . Comparing their output to a 50Mpx sensor taken through a good fast lens will reveal significant deficiencies. If you the put that 50Mpx image through something like the software that the phone image is being subject to, Luminar Neo for example, the difference is night and day.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Dslr advice wanted!

Comments