you are correct, most professionals use Canon for the better image quality, performance and features however the camera and lens for indoor dancing can cost so it depends on your budget and what you consider "mid range" - e.g. Canon 6D (full frame) - $1,700 and 70-200 2.8 zoom telephoto ($1,300 - $2,000). Or you could use cheaper prime lens like 100mm 2.8 or 85mm 1.8 - $300 used
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Thinking of convert to Canon
- Thread starter MIngegneri
- Start date
Deleted1929
Forum Pro
> most professionals use Canon for the better image quality, performance and features
Apart from the vast number of pros who use Nikon ( or something else ).
You just sound like a Canon marketing employee making such silly claims.
Apart from the vast number of pros who use Nikon ( or something else ).
You just sound like a Canon marketing employee making such silly claims.
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL, well I don't know what 'most' Pros use but I can say from my observations at many dance competitions that most of 'those' Pros are carrying Canon.
Well, obviously your personal observations at a few dance competitions is 100% indicative of professionals camera use around the globe. (just kidding, it doesn't. Even considering a camera because 'some pros use it' is a silly approach to camera buying)
Exceot for where I live, don't come here or you'll have to change your thinking on the subject - its more like fifty-fifty.
EXX
Senior Member
Reading through all the responses, my 2 cents are:
Camera brand on itself not so important. What you need is good low light performance, so I would look more into that direction. Any APS-C camera will do better than your current Olympus. FF is even better, but that will cost $$$, so I think APS-C will be best you can get.
What you really need is good glass: you can have as much camera as you want, if the lens is average, you get average pictures. If budget is tight, have a look at second hand glass.
An eaxmple : a new Sony A57 together with a Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 APO HS from Ebay will do great at low light, compared to your Olympus and will cost around $2000. I know, this lens does not cover the complete range of your current lens, it is just an example of a very good lens. You could consider to add a good budget 35mm prime (around $200 new for Sony) to cover the area below 80mm, but that you have to change lenses.
You now use a 50-200mm lens, which is 100-400mm 35mm equivalent. On APS-C this would result in something like a 70-210 or 70-300. Due to the fact that the APS-C sensors of today are much better than the sensor in your Olympus, you may get away with a 70-300 F/4 lens.
Camera brand on itself not so important. What you need is good low light performance, so I would look more into that direction. Any APS-C camera will do better than your current Olympus. FF is even better, but that will cost $$$, so I think APS-C will be best you can get.
What you really need is good glass: you can have as much camera as you want, if the lens is average, you get average pictures. If budget is tight, have a look at second hand glass.
An eaxmple : a new Sony A57 together with a Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 APO HS from Ebay will do great at low light, compared to your Olympus and will cost around $2000. I know, this lens does not cover the complete range of your current lens, it is just an example of a very good lens. You could consider to add a good budget 35mm prime (around $200 new for Sony) to cover the area below 80mm, but that you have to change lenses.
You now use a 50-200mm lens, which is 100-400mm 35mm equivalent. On APS-C this would result in something like a 70-210 or 70-300. Due to the fact that the APS-C sensors of today are much better than the sensor in your Olympus, you may get away with a 70-300 F/4 lens.
No I haven't, I've only seen large groups of professional dancers in a few other forms of dance, also large groups of professional athletes (boy, do they move fast), professional skateboarders (even faster), mountain bikers (faster again), lumberjack comps (a dozen things happening at once all around you, most of which can kill you), and many other examples where I know that it is 100% practical and feasible to swap lenses, whenever you need to.
Question is, why would you need to so often? One of those 'I'll miss the shot of my life if I take 30seconds to change a lens and National Geographic will skip me over' type scenarios taking over?
Again, why would you be? This makes no sense. If you are in a spot, shooting something in another spot, you are going to use a certain lens to get the framing you want. Once you decide on this lens, and the people are performing, you are going to use that lens for many shots. Or is your workflow to find that lens, take a few, then switch, and repeat?
If so, I can tell you with certainty that it's not the physical act of switching that is impractical, it is not working your one lens choice sufficiently that is the problem. If you are at a competition for, say, two hours. You have two lenses. Shoot with one for the first half, take thirty seconds to switch (even if you only end up with 1999 photos instead of 2001) and shoot the second half with the other lens?
If you aren't going to take the stepsa 'pro' would do, like two bodies as you mention below, certainly a small, inconsicuential compromise would be missing out on a shot or two to switch your lens?
I just grabbed my camera, my 70-300mm VR, and my 28mm f/2.8 prime, and timed myself switching. (prime in pocket, switch and place zoom in bag between legs on floor) - it didn't take long at all. Does it take you an unusually long time to switch?
Last edited:
Guidenet
Forum Pro
Marian, actually I have been to both ballroom and swing competitions as well as Carolina Shag competitions. I know exactly what you're talking about.
What you're asking for is a quality pro-grade lens in a wide to long high ratio zoom lens that is also fast. They don't make such a lens. The 18-200 type of lens is usually pretty slow and not pro-quality optics. That's just how it it because a professional doesn't normally consider this kind of lens. To design one that is a fixed aperture f/2.8 would be expensive and result in a large, heavy weapon instead of a good optic.
The only good solution is to learn how to pace your shots well so you're doing quite a bit with one lens, then do the same with another. How do you think professional wedding photographers do it? I'm a corporate photographer and do large company events quite often for a living. I use the one lens on and one lens in my pocket technique a lot. Changing lenses is a few second chore. I don't care how crowded the room is. Sometimes I do use a zoom lens, but it's a rather short ratio 35-70 f/2.8 on a full frame camera. No crop factor.
This is a large photography forum here at DPR and you'll find a lot of us do what you're doing. Think about taking the advice more seriously than discounting it to match your preconceived ideas. Were there a top grade, fast wide to tele zoom with 10x ratio and with fixed f/2.8 aperture, I'd have suggested it in the first place. Because this doesn't exist, we have to work around it. You're not going to get exactly what you want.
Take Care.
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't want to swap lens during a competition, a single dance heat will last only 1.5 minutes. I believe the discussion on this got diverted from my original question when I was asking about maybe moving to Canon and looking for lens with a desired range. The answer simply is that there isn't a single lens that can handle the range and produce a quality picture. Fine, that's the answer.
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't want to swap lens during a competition, a single dance heat will last only 1.5 minutes. I believe the discussion on this got diverted from my original question when I was asking about maybe moving to Canon and looking for lens with a desired range. The answer simply is that there isn't a single lens that can handle the range and produce a quality picture. Fine, that's the answer.
Guidenet
Forum Pro
I'm going to ignore the rather annoying attitude and cut and pasted remark just to say you might want to consider a mid zoom fast lens. I doubt you need 200mm length for indoor competition. Something along Canon or Nikon's 24-70 f/2.8 would probably get the job done nicely.
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
Thank you. Yes, I probably should have started the discussion with what I was trying to achieve and not with a specific camera brand. Maybe I should start over
I'll do some research on other configurations. I appreciate all advice.
I'll do some research on other configurations. I appreciate all advice.
I think you can narrow your search to a APS-C body and finding the right lens. Your old system is equivalent to a 67mm to 267mm for Nikon, Sony or Pentax and 62.5mm to 250mm for Canon. I do not think the particular brand of body is of any real importance to your search, the key is finding a lens you can life with, then pick a body it supports.MIngegneri wrote:
Thank you. Yes, I probably should have started the discussion with what I was trying to achieve and not with a specific camera brand. Maybe I should start over
I'll do some research on other configurations. I appreciate all advice.
The problem is going to be in the affordable with large aperture and large zoom ratio. I am not sure you can find that at any price. Lots of 55-200, 55-300, 70-300, 18-270mm etc. lenses but they tend to be slower. The longest fast zooms are the 70 to 200mm f/2.8s lots of those around for the various bodies. They would be about as wide as your current set-up but not as long on a APS-C body. You may want to look at getting an adaptor to m4/3 and keep your current lens and put it on a Pentax OM-D E-M5.
You also need to decide if you want reach or speed. A Sony 70-400 f/4-5.6 IIG is a wonderful lens with lots of reach (Nikon has equivalent) but you lose a few stops of speed. The Sony 70-200 f/2.8 is also a wonderful lens and fast but you lose the reach. (Canon, and NIkon have equivalent lenses). The Sigma 50-150 gives you a little wider, is fast at f/2.8 but not as long.
wazu
Senior Member
By all means dump your 4/3rds system camera and move up a level or two to a full frame 6D or even better 5D3, you're requirements for lens could be filled by the 70-300L. This will likely mean having to bump the ISO to around 3200-6400 depending on the lighting conditions and shutter speed. You might also get enough focal range with the 24-105 and some cropping for tight closeups. This lens is slightly faster so it will help to keep the ISO from going above 6400 which I consider the ceiling for both of these cameras. This lens is also available as a kit option to either body.
The big difference between the two cameras is AF ability. It might help to rent the 6D and kit lens to try out if the f8 center point with expansion nails the focus for you. I would be inclined to opt for the 5D3 since you are probably going to need AI servo and many cross points to be able to follow motion.
Once you've shot full frame it is difficult to accept crop let alone 4/3rds sensors.
Canon now leads for cleaner IQ in darker situations at higher ISOs, Nikon trails...
from that point on...
Canon continued to lead with 1DX/5DMkIII... surpassing 5DMkII, and nothing has come close...
all Nikon could offer was what it was good at better DR, albeit at lower ISOs, and much brighter lighting conditions... it knew, it had to fall back when the D3x failed, thus, their D800 settled for excellence at lower ISOs, in brighter lighting conditions, and capped high ISO performance IQ below D3s.
Nikon's next improvement to D3s high ISO flagship would be its higher MP (more than 12, but less than 16) would be it's newer D4, it did improve on DR for brighter light at lower ISOs but with more MP, did not fare as well as even the older D3s with less MP at higher ISOs, so, it was a mixed improvement only over its own D3s... still below the older 5DMkII, and very behind 1DX and 5DMkIII
SEE HERE... it all depends on whether you are shooting lots of bright high contrast scenarios, which Nikons excel at lower ISOs, but they fare far worse than Canons if you are opting to concentrate on shooting lots of low light scenarios where higher ISOs are CLEANER for IQ as well as still offering higher MP (18-22/23)... and higher fps to boot... and faster AF too...
these are all FF... and all are clearcut 'leaders' in cleaner IQ in lower light at higher ISOs...
of course, if you opt for older, or lesser 'more densely packed' pixels on an APS-C sensor of either Nikon or Canon... you are not going to expect the best in IQ for such low light high ISO IQ performance... it may not be 'paydirt' images as a pro might demand, but if you are okay wit
we're not talking about shadow recovery in BRIGHT CONTRASTY LIGHT at only LOW ISOs, which is not the same thing,... an area even cellphone cameras can handle just as well 'post-processed' as the current higher DR dSLRs like Nikons D3s, etc (RAW 'fixing' poor JPG renditions, or improperly exposed JPGs set at too high a contrast setting in-camera in the first place)
the GRAPH you see, was the work of a NIKON GUY... (also member of DPR forums like us)
bill claff...
he DOES show other graphs showing Nikon's superiority in greater DR at LOWER ISOs, but we all know this is great for brighter higher contrasty shooting scenarios (like bright sunny day scenery)
cellphones excel in the same manner, because the tech has been around since the dawning of digital sensors, all Nikon/Sony and others did was scale it up from their CCD digicam forebearers, which always exhibited good DR in GOOD LIGHT... look at all the older Nikon models all the way back to D1 and D2... it differs little from D800/D600, however, D3/D3s/D4 mandate is like Canon's mandate for all its dSLRs... excelling in higher ISOs with cleaner IQ in LOWER/LOWEST LIGHT...
all the rest, are riding the old high DR in 'good light' wagon to stay afloat, but remain behind their 'lead models'.
i
ADD to CANONS SENSOR LEAD... most thought incorrectly it was behind... recent software/firmware work by MagicLantern UNLOCKED greater potential of many of Canons 'high ISO' oriented sensors to reveal even greater DR range than previously thought possible... and we're talking about sensors that haven't NEEDED ANY CHANGES OR IMPROVEMENTS, even older Canon sensors show more potential too... revealing greater performance for either stills or (CINE)VIDEO...
now all the supposedly 'in-the-know' Canon critics/detrators are stunned and speechless... except those still oblivious to these facts, and keep on regurgitating old arguments that Canon sensors are 'behind' and 'outdated' and not leading-edge.
it all depends on what 'leading edge' one wants...
does one want 'leading edge' cleaner IQ in lower light at higher ISOs? (=Canon)
or does one want 'leading edge' greater DR in brighter contrasty light at lower ISOs? (=Nikon/Sony/everyone else/most cellphones for the last 15 years... hence the smartphonecam boon... that is 'high dof' centric... virtually focus free like the olden days of tiny apertured high dof 'infinity' focus disposable film cameras)...
--
sdyue
sure Canon has better leading edge "IQ" and other features compared to Nikon but is it relevant to the OP ?
Guidenet
Forum Pro
So what have we here? Does Beagle = Sdyue = SDyue's dead husband as well? Or what kind of error happened here?
Beagle, you really messed this up. heheheh
--
Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile
Last edited:
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks for the input, lots of information to think through. I can probably sacrifice some reach on a lens to get the speed. You may be right, working backwards from the lens that will give me the results I'm looing for.
Thanks again.
Thanks again.
david01234
Well-known member
To the OP,
It would be better for you to seek advice from an actual professional photographer on a specific field of photography rather than from the DPR forum.
If you dig deep enough, you'll notice that some posters are advocates of a specific brand and it would be difficult to obtain unbiased opinions.
It would be better for you to seek advice from an actual professional photographer on a specific field of photography rather than from the DPR forum.
If you dig deep enough, you'll notice that some posters are advocates of a specific brand and it would be difficult to obtain unbiased opinions.
MIngegneri
Member
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
Thank you, yes that is true about some owner bias but I find that to be true of actual pro photographers as well; a need to justify their buying decision.
I'm okay with people doing that, I may restart a discussion looking for opinions for my photography challenges and not starting out with Canon.
I'm not tied to Canon or Nikon, and I'm fine with hearing people's ideas outside of those brands. I own an Olympus which has been a great camera. I've always owed them, even from my days in film. But it isn't the best camera for the dance photography that I'm doing. Since I'm not, nor wish to be the official photographer for these events I don't want to spend what a pro would invest. I just think with a budget somewhere around $1.5k - $2.5 I can get a camera set up that will give me better results than I'm getting currently with my Olympus E-510.
Thanks.
I'm okay with people doing that, I may restart a discussion looking for opinions for my photography challenges and not starting out with Canon.
I'm not tied to Canon or Nikon, and I'm fine with hearing people's ideas outside of those brands. I own an Olympus which has been a great camera. I've always owed them, even from my days in film. But it isn't the best camera for the dance photography that I'm doing. Since I'm not, nor wish to be the official photographer for these events I don't want to spend what a pro would invest. I just think with a budget somewhere around $1.5k - $2.5 I can get a camera set up that will give me better results than I'm getting currently with my Olympus E-510.
Thanks.
jonrobertp
Forum Pro
Buy one of each. Or at least try them repeatedly. Each brand...and I've had 5, has it's pros & cons...none are perfect.
SystemAgnostic
Leading Member
- Messages
- 867
- Reaction score
- 437
I think you first should research and think about how you are actually taking photos - specifically around focal length needed. Your current lens is 100-400mm equivalent, which seems very long to me. I use less focal length for shooting outdoors soccer or softball! You may find that taking photos of people who are closer leads to less DOF and more interesting shots, with the limitation of not being able to always get all performers. If you only need long range on occasion, then you can crop the picture. Or, perhaps I'm writing rubbish and using 400mm at the performances is crucial.
Once you've decided that, you can choose a lens as others suggested. Canon and Nikon have very similar lineups, BUT - Canon has some very nice non-IS 70-200mm lenses which are in your price range, and at high shutter speeds you probably don't need IS. I'm not as familiar with Pentax or Sony.
Since you are indoors, and if you decide you don't need such extreme focal length, then a full frame might be the way to go. For example, a Canon 6D with the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS is in your price range, with the non-IS 2.8 version of the lens would be a bit above your price range.
Once you've decided that, you can choose a lens as others suggested. Canon and Nikon have very similar lineups, BUT - Canon has some very nice non-IS 70-200mm lenses which are in your price range, and at high shutter speeds you probably don't need IS. I'm not as familiar with Pentax or Sony.
Since you are indoors, and if you decide you don't need such extreme focal length, then a full frame might be the way to go. For example, a Canon 6D with the 70-200mm f/4 non-IS is in your price range, with the non-IS 2.8 version of the lens would be a bit above your price range.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum