So like i say do you think you would have time to move to the other body, which would need to be on a tripod, or even without a tripod or monopod, set up the shot, and click away, considering the car is there for 3-5 seconds total and you need to do the same with the first body and lens ?
Is there an equivalency list between Canon and Nikon DSLR's?
- Thread starter ralv585
- Start date
^
I would choose the lens that suited where I was shooting from, you don't need to switch around at a circit- the cars follow the racing line.
Trust me TBL NOBODY has a 200-400 is the press room. NOBODY has the 200-400 trackside. I haven't seen one in the hands of ANYONE at any sports event.
*As for the time to change, the monopod is gripped to my body, the other body is often on my shoulder - it takes roughly 0.5-1 second to switch body.
I would choose the lens that suited where I was shooting from, you don't need to switch around at a circit- the cars follow the racing line.
Trust me TBL NOBODY has a 200-400 is the press room. NOBODY has the 200-400 trackside. I haven't seen one in the hands of ANYONE at any sports event.
*As for the time to change, the monopod is gripped to my body, the other body is often on my shoulder - it takes roughly 0.5-1 second to switch body.
Last edited:
Yup. I'd rather have the two bodies, and just swap between them. I don't do motor sport, I imagine 2bl doesn't - so i'm not certain, but I assume it's generally the better to have the specialized lens on each camera.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- London Town!
This is turning into the usual holy war this forum has previously been quite good at avoiding unfortunately.
It's a fairly abstract example, the 200-400 exists for a reason and is excellent, but it's not for every situation. The primes are better and faster and work better with tele-convertors. The 200-400 is nice if you can't pack a heap of glass or you're working in nasty conditions and don't want to be swapping lenses.
It also highly depends what you shoot and what other lenses you have. The 200-400 isn't great with tele-convertors (not bad, but not as good or as fast as the primes), which means if you regularly need greater than 400m you need a 500 or 600mm lens as well. For wildlife the 400mm prime plus TC14 and a 70-200 (which you need anyway) on a spare body has always been a better combination in my experience.
End of the day, there are lenses in both lineups which are a bit special, doesn't make one system better. The bodies are much of a muchness at every level, there are some Nikon's which are better (D700 in my view) and some Canon's (7D in my view) and some where it's indistinguishable (1DIV/D3x) and that changes over time as new ones are released...
It's a fairly abstract example, the 200-400 exists for a reason and is excellent, but it's not for every situation. The primes are better and faster and work better with tele-convertors. The 200-400 is nice if you can't pack a heap of glass or you're working in nasty conditions and don't want to be swapping lenses.
It also highly depends what you shoot and what other lenses you have. The 200-400 isn't great with tele-convertors (not bad, but not as good or as fast as the primes), which means if you regularly need greater than 400m you need a 500 or 600mm lens as well. For wildlife the 400mm prime plus TC14 and a 70-200 (which you need anyway) on a spare body has always been a better combination in my experience.
End of the day, there are lenses in both lineups which are a bit special, doesn't make one system better. The bodies are much of a muchness at every level, there are some Nikon's which are better (D700 in my view) and some Canon's (7D in my view) and some where it's indistinguishable (1DIV/D3x) and that changes over time as new ones are released...
At the end of the day with canikon they both do the job and like I said earlier it's just what get's you the best results. For me the Canon feels better and I get better results, but the other guy was the other way around.
Aside from 1/2 special lenses they both produce an essentially identical range [everyone uses the same set-up at the events I've been too]
Aside from one or two bodies they are both identical in performance.
(BTW BRS it's 1DIV/D3s
)
Either way, both essentially equal set-ups.
Aside from 1/2 special lenses they both produce an essentially identical range [everyone uses the same set-up at the events I've been too]
Aside from one or two bodies they are both identical in performance.
(BTW BRS it's 1DIV/D3s
)Either way, both essentially equal set-ups.
Last edited:
Nah not really, it's just a tit spewing rubbish with everyone else correcting him.
You've never shot motorsport have you!!
You don't burst shoot motorsport.
You can't zoom when shooting it, it gives motion streaks try it - go from 100mm to 50mm at a shutter speed of 1/125 - you'll get a zoom burst.
Your file will be sharper from a prime anyway.
You only fire two or three ****s at a time.
You compose the shot in one spot, only shoot when the cars there.
30% of the time it's manual focus and you motordrive when the car crosses the crest into the focus point.
Because the shot is composed you only use one focal length.
In sports the 200-400 is useless.
You've never shot motorsport have you!!
You don't burst shoot motorsport.
You can't zoom when shooting it, it gives motion streaks try it - go from 100mm to 50mm at a shutter speed of 1/125 - you'll get a zoom burst.
Your file will be sharper from a prime anyway.
You only fire two or three ****s at a time.
You compose the shot in one spot, only shoot when the cars there.
30% of the time it's manual focus and you motordrive when the car crosses the crest into the focus point.
Because the shot is composed you only use one focal length.
In sports the 200-400 is useless.
Was hoping someone who does sports would post - I'm not even sure myself, but I imagine having two bodies and primes would be the most ideal way.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
I do sports too but I do burst (did with the 40D - not done anything with the 7D).
Either way it's low burst + AI Servo and then ditch the OOF shots at Import.
Clearly people have different styles
Either way i'm staggered by my 7D and couldn't care less a Nikon is better, you buy what you want or what system your stuck in, changing systems seems a little pointless IMO.
With most sports I burst - always at high speed but I don't burst for more than four or five shots.
With motorsport 75% servo & high speed bursts of 2 or 3 shots (no point in any more) but when shooting over a crest you burst the crest and MF. Even the 1 series with primes can't hit a car coming over the crest.
Would writing a tutorial of my sports shooting be of benefit to anyone?
With motorsport 75% servo & high speed bursts of 2 or 3 shots (no point in any more) but when shooting over a crest you burst the crest and MF. Even the 1 series with primes can't hit a car coming over the crest.
Would writing a tutorial of my sports shooting be of benefit to anyone?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,340
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I do sports too but I do burst (did with the 40D - not done anything with the 7D).
Either way it's low burst + AI Servo and then ditch the OOF shots at Import.
Clearly people have different styles
Either way i'm staggered by my 7D and couldn't care less a Nikon is better, you buy what you want or what system your stuck in, changing systems seems a little pointless IMO.
I wont say changing system is pointless.
But changing system for the sake of a body, i think is pointless.
Since you can always get the flag ship one and they are both as good as each other. ISO, AF, build quality, in all respect they are both amazing.
Unless you change for reasons such as needing to shoot movies then you have to pick Canon.
If you want lots of primes then Canon too...
If you want fast AF in FF then Nikon, only because of the D700. Take that away, you will take away a major reason why a lot of people have gone over to Nikon in the past 2 years. And even those have gone over to Nikon misses the primes that Canon offers. I know I will miss my 16-35/2.8 (Nikon only does one with F/4 and their 14-24 can't even take a UV filter). I will also miss my 135L (I know Nikon has one but i don't think it has the same magic the Canon one does), then I will also miss the 1.2 lenses in 50/85. And the 35/1.4, Nikon is missing that one too. Oh, Nikon also missing Canon's F/4 L glass range too, the 70-200s for example.
Nikon do have the wireless flash system built in but then again, if you are really into that, you get pocket wizards anyway.
I almost went over to Nikon 18 months ago, did the math and it would've only cost me £300 or so to switch but the reason was for the D700, for its AF over the 5Dii. That is it. I am looking at it long term, then the 7D came out with the new AF. In my mind, there is no doubt whatsoever that AF will be implemented in the Mkiii of the 5D, thus this takes away the main reason going to the D700.
Canon can fix the main reason of switching to Nikon with 1 body upgrade (and if i can afford the 1Ds, that reason doesn't even exists), where Nikon will have to bring out about half a dozen lenses to fill the gaps in their range.
I would certainly be interested, it's an area I'm looking to try out soon and would like some pointers.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- London Town!
I was under the impression that the 7D now supports using the built in flash in commander mode? Could be wrong though.
I know of absolutely nobody who uses the wireless flash system though, speedlights are just too expensive and too limited for most things, you can buy a decent strobe setup and a pair of pocketwizards for the same money as 3/4 top end speedlights at the end of the day.
Also, the Nikon 135 DC is (although rather old now) a thing of beauty as a portrait lens. And the Nikon 17-35 f/2.8 is a 77mm thread for filters or the 16-35 f/4 gets VR. The 14-24 is a different proposition altogether as mentioned before... But yes, the F/4 L glass is missing, I've argued before that Nikon criminally neglect the mid-range at times...
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- London Town!
I think it'd be interesting seeing as you obviously have a lot of experience and talent in that area! I think it's a very complex area with lots of different techniques though and personal opinion about how to do something will vary, I like to shoot 2+ second high speed bursts for sports for instance.
Sometimes, snowboarding is a good example, it's the only way to get decent results without spending all day shooting and sometimes I just like it as it catches interesting facial expressions and moments - shooting cricket a 2 or 3 second burst of a batsman catches a lot of discrete moments from trigger movements to follow through...)
Experience perhaps...
Talent ... nope!!
I'll try and sort one out later. (motorsports is my thing so I might start with that for now...)
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 1,675
- Location
- Solihull/Cardiff
Motorsports would be an interesting read, I did Goodwood FOS this weekend, doing Formula SAE in 2 weeks time, looking at the BDC over the summer, and have done BTCC and FIA GT in the past, and I'd like some tips on it, because some of the days I just come back with lots of very similar images
I guess the main problem is a lack of knowledge of the tracks and where I can get good shots from.... and my lack of a press pass (Those are my excuses anyway )Motorsports would be an interesting read, I did Goodwood FOS this weekend, doing Formula SAE in 2 weeks time, looking at the BDC over the summer, and have done BTCC and FIA GT in the past, and I'd like some tips on it, because some of the days I just come back with lots of very similar images
I only get a press pass half the time...
Yet I see so many n00bs getting them because they are 'connected' 
The key is certainly to experiment.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- London Town!
I'm sure a motor-sport one will be popular here, not my thing but I think a lot of people here are into it...
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Ladies, Ladies, Ladies...I think we need to cold chill for a moment. Why can't we just accept that both Canon and Nikon make superb camera bodies and lenses and leave it at that? They are so good in fact, with such little difference between them that it really is just a matter of which system you prefer.
I can't help but think that the argument is absolutely pointless. I know that for some of you this will be like pushing against an open door and I apologise.
I can't help but think that the argument is absolutely pointless. I know that for some of you this will be like pushing against an open door and I apologise.