Camera Upgrade

[DanK]

I can vouch for the EF 70-200 f/4 IS; it's a wonderful lens and a great length on a crop sensor. However, you may want more length, and you may want to spend less. It ain't cheap.

Looking over my images, I think my 2 stop comment comparing the 50D and 5D might be off, but I think the point stands. All cameras achieve high ISOs by amplifying the signal from the sensor, and even with high end cameras, that takes its toll if you push it too high. I did a bunch of indoor flash photos soon after I got my 5D3. The ISO 800 shots were very clean, but the ISO 1600 shots showed some problems. I think the best, unless you really need high ISOs, is to try to get more light.

[mknittle]

The important question is - how much of your money can we spend? We are quite good at spending other peoples savings!

I'm undecided about suggesting a secondhand 40D or 50D and then getting seriously better lenses; or the current 7D and better glass. Or ditch the lot (some resale value) and change brands.

Either way, I would concentrate on upgrading lenses rather than spending a lot of money on a body.

I have a 7D and a 40D. Both would do what you want.

I am very happy with my 7D. I had the same problem s you are having with my old XS. by time I waded through the menus to get the settings the shot was gone. The 7D is much easer to set. once you get used to it. It won't make you a better photographer , but a less frustrated one

[Kyle]

Regarding lenses, Kyle.

With the Sigma did you mean 150-500? I have that lens and it is good for the money with plenty of extra reach but . . .

Yeah I meant the 150-500. Seems like you can get one for $800 or so. I would like to get birds in flight but it's not my focus right now.

The previous comment about getting a prime lens like the Canon 400, plus a 1.4x converter when required is good advice for wildlife use. But not having a zoom may be limiting for other uses, as well as a fairly long minimum focusing distance. A decision which only you can make.

As much as I'd love a prime I don't know if I trust myself with a long prime. I have a 55mm prime and while it's great I have to get use to moving rather than zooming.

Originally I had a Canon 28-135 lens and that served me well. A fairly decent lens for the price; I think it has now been replaced by an 18-135 ? Also the Canon 70-300 is good for the money. Or the L range version if you can afford it.

I was looking into the 18-135 and it's apparently good. The 70-300 is as you say good. Guess it really depends on what exactly I want to do with it and what I can afford.

And then what about a macro lens for all that smaller wildlife . . .

Now you're really just trying to spend my money!

[Kyle]

...The 7D is much easer to set. once you get used to it. It won't make you a better photographer , but a less frustrated one

That's really all I'm looking for with the new camera body.

[Kyle]

I think the best, unless you really need high ISOs, is to try to get more light.

I don't expect a new camera body to allow me to take noiseless photos at 3200 ISO. The 7D2 was said to have better high ISO performance. I was hoping to get a little bit of a cleaner image for 800 - 3200 iso.

I don't use flash when taking wildlife shots. I am not sure if I should or not but I don't feel like I should be blinding the animals and I am not sure the camera flash would make a big difference.
One of the next big things I need to buy is a flash. I've been putting it off. It seems like there is a ton to learn about how to use them and how to set up multiple. I'll get to it eventually.

[jcuknz]

""-3 FPS and 3 frame buffer. Taking any more than 1 or 2 shots causes the camera to slow down and process. Makes it near impossible to get any good shots of anything moving""

LOL I wonder how photographers got those great action shots before burst? Coudn't have been skill?

[ajohnw]

Burst shooting is not something I do. I click away instead. The comment about moving is interesting. i assume dslr's don't focus between shots especially at high frame rates - that's why I click away. Basically I have never tried it and have just assumed that is the case. I might on something that was effectively stationary distance wise but have never shot anything suitable.

High frame rates are great for some things but not for others.

I took some shots of a heron recently. It wasn't moving distance wise but turning it's head etc feeding. Bursts might have been useful in this case as some shots showed the bird looking away or in poses that I didn't like. I reckon that something like a 1min burst might have caught the pose I wanted - that is rather a lot of shots. Even at 3 shots per second a 10 shot burst probably wouldn't have increased my chances of catching the same pose. It might do if I waited until the bird started to move into the pose I wanted - or more correctly I thought that it was going to.

My E-M1 spec's 10 or 6 fps for continuous shooting. I shoot raw plus best jpg so i can get 35 shots before it slows down at 10fps or 39 at 6fps. The 6fps uses the current AF mode setting while taking the shots. Focus is fixed at 10. This means that I get either 3.5 secs worth of frames or 6.5 secs worth. It then slows down to around the equivalent of 1.6fps. 1.6fps would probably be of use in the herons case but it does it in hickups like most cameras do.

The 7D has 8 fps and will take 24 raw shots before it slows down. It then takes 2 shots at 8 with a 0.45 sec gap in between. giving 4.9fps. Unlike the E-M1 it will more or less hold large fine jpg's at 8 fps for ever or at least for more than 300 frames. The e-m1 does 134 and then slows down to 5fps. Still too fast really for all sorts of things. It seems no 7D users shoot raw plus jpg as the figures aren't given.

Leaves me wondering why they all don't have a 1fps setting and why we have to put up with what are often silly numbers in practice. Some could get as high as 3 or 4 continuously for ever. As I see it this option would be of far more use as I can't press the button that fast.

John
-

[Kyle]

Burst shooting is not something I do. I click away instead. The comment about moving is interesting. i assume dslr's don't focus between shots especially at high frame rates - that's why I click away. Basically I have never tried it and have just assumed that is the case. I might on something that was effectively stationary distance wise but have never shot anything suitable.

High frame rates are great for some things but not for others.
-

I almost always do the same, click away instead of burst. The 3 frame buffer there is where the problem comes in which as someone else said is likely also caused by a slow SD card.
I want the burst for trying new things, like birds flying. The T3 does work for this but if I try to do anything too quickly it needs to catch up. More FPS will help there but I know I also need to work on the technique.

[Kyle]

LOL I wonder how photographers got those great action shots before burst? Coudn't have been skill?

Luckily I don't consider myself a skillful photographer

[ajohnw]

I almost always do the same, click away instead of burst. The 3 frame buffer there is where the problem comes in which as someone else said is likely also caused by a slow SD card.
I want the burst for trying new things, like birds flying. The T3 does work for this but if I try to do anything too quickly it needs to catch up. More FPS will help there but I know I also need to work on the technique.

I was just trying to point out that high frame rates aren't always a great thing to have. They are the sort of thing that might be of use photographing a tennis serve. That's where they come into their own.

What you should get on your camera is

JPEG: 3.0 fps until card is full
RAW: 2.0 fps for 6 frames, then around 1.2 fps. 3 seconds to recover.
RAW+JPEG: 1.3 fps for 2 frames, then around 0.8 fps. 3 seconds to recover.

When specs are quoted I always wonder what size jpg has been used. I always use the highest possible quality settings on jpg's.

John
-

[Kyle]

Thanks for the info John. That seems to be consistent with what I actually get out of my camera. I always shoot RAW. At this point I don't know why I'd shoot jpg outside of trying to save space or get a slightly faster fps.

[Kyle]

After doing a bunch of research on reviews and the prices of used gear in my area I think I've figured out what I will be looking to purchase (Depending on my actual budget which I should figure out tonight).
I'll likely buy a used 7D which you can now find for 700-900 used. I'll replace my 18-55mm with an 18-135 IS STM. I've read that this is a great walkabout lens and it covers a better focal range than the 18-55. My 55-250mm IS should be a decent zoom for now.

Once I get a bit more money to get another lens after that I will likely look for the new Tamron 150-600 which is getting good reviews and will hopefully have some decently priced used ones (not that it is currently too expensive).

Thanks again for all the advice everyone.

[Polar01]

Sound like a good plan.

Cheers: Allan

[mknittle]

Sound like a good plan.

Cheers: Allan

X2.