Canon 1 D Mark IV or Canon 7D Mark II to shot volleyball

Hello.

I´m a indoor sport photographer . I have take professional volleyball pictures during 4 years with my Canon 6D that has now 119.000 shots. To save it, i´ve decided to buy another camera.

I´ve bought a 80D in June, however i ´ve sold it yesterday, because the camera has a very slow focus when is inside a pavillion to shot volleyball , basket or other indoor sports. The picture quality disappointed me a lot, especially the ISO noise above 4000… It´s a great camera to recording vídeos, but i don´t care about it…

I was told that to shot volleyball, i would go for a Canon 1 D Mark IV (in second hand), or a new Canon 7D Mark 2. So here is my question- I want a camera with fast autofocus, great iso performance above 4000, and specially GREAT IMAGE QUALITY as my Canon 6D that has no iso noise, even at ISO 6400 in indoor sports. The arena where i take the volleyball shots, has a poor light…

I send 3 links where you can see the pictures that i´ve taken with the 80D, that i really don´t like. I want better quality that these images.

If you can help me in my doubts, it would be great!

Thanks a lot.

Carlos Leão

https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/s...9DCYaXk0WA91aZwBU4?ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy

https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/s...pJNdTATTiyLyx5Wzov?ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy

https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/s...zlhdUT4rjJLuTdGrgw?ref_=cd_ph_share_link_copy

Hi,

whilst the 1d mk4 is a fantastic camera, you might find the image quality a little disappointing over ISO 4000, especially compared to a 6D. I'd say the 1d4 is good to around 3200 tops. A 1dx would be a better option for higher ISO performance. But, given you like the 6D and are familiar with it, why not just buy another one?

Nick On, the 6D is very good for landscape, but for sports i want something higher than 7fps.

Thanks!

Carlos Carmo

Carlosleao said:

Nick On, the 6D is very good for landscape, but for sports i want something higher than 7fps.

Thanks!

Carlos Carmo

Click to expand...

Neither of them will give you what you want at 4000+. The APS-H sensor should be less noisy than the APS-C.

One problem with the 1D MKIV is that it's slow to lock initial AF and it takes a bit of practice to achieve that. Once you lock the AF hit ratio is around 85%-90% of in-focus frames. Don't know about the 7D MKII, don't have one.

If you are after high ISO performance for indoor sports go for a second hand 1Dx

Sports Shooter said:

Carlosleao said:

Nick On, the 6D is very good for landscape, but for sports i want something higher than 7fps.

Thanks!

Carlos Carmo

Click to expand...

Neither of them will give you what you want at 4000+. The APS-H sensor should be less noisy than the APS-C.

One problem with the 1D MKIV is that it's slow to lock initial AF and it takes a bit of practice to achieve that. Once you lock the AF hit ratio is around 85%-90% of in-focus frames. Don't know about the 7D MKII, don't have one.

If you are after high ISO performance for indoor sports go for a second hand 1Dx

Click to expand...

Also your sample photos look to be underexposed a bit and this will make the noise more prominent. Can you share the exif data?

Thanks for your advice, Sports Shooter!

Carlosleao

None of them will impress you compared to your 6D. Only an 1DX, 1DX II or 5D mkIV can top your 6D on both lower noise and higher FPS.

Okay - I've had both, and shot with both. I shoot a lot of indoor high school and grade school basketball, so I feel for you in terms of the lighting in the typical venues.

That said, I had a 7D2 and sold it after only 2 games just this past week, as I just did not like how the images looked. Most people who shoot indoor sports for very long learn rather quickly that noise is a fact of life - that sharpness or clarity from good AF lock is far more important than blurry, but less noisy images. That said, the 1D4 will give you less noise than the 7D2 between the two cameras you've talked about.

Good luck in whatever choice you end up making.

Yes, but the prob is that in 6D i already have 230.000 shots, and i don´want to be all my life wasting the sensor with volleyball games.

Thanks!


Carlos Leão

Thanks a lot for your explanation!

Carlos Leão

About slow focus:

I just pointed my 80D with its 18 - 135mm Nano lens into a dark hallway of my office, and focused on different things, and it jumped immediately from subjects 2 meters and 5 meters and 1 meter away. I tried it with the lens zoomed out to 135mm, so the focusing aperture was f5.6, and with it zoomed to 18mm, so the focusing aperture was f 3.5.

No slow focus on my camera.

And if I had an f2.8 lens, it might be even faster, but any increase in speed would not be seen by the human eye.

About so-called IQ:

I looked at your three sample photographs, and then put them into Photoshop.

About 5 seconds in Photoshop, per picture, using the levels command, brightened the whites while holding detail and whacked up the snappiness by making the blacks slightly darker.

About arena lighting:

Yes, it certainly is terrible. I noticed that there are no shadows on the floor cast by the players.

Did you adjust the contrast on your 80D before you took the flat, dull (in the contrast sense, not the interestingness of the pictures) sample pictures?

Boring history -- back in the declining olden days of film, we had dozens of films to pick from, and if we were shooting basketball or volleyball in a contrast-free room, we would have shot with VPH (the H standing for high contrast) or Porta VC or Ultra (vivid color and "ultra" snappy color.)

In the modern days, it's easy to adjust the camera to come up with the same advantages as changing films.

Answering your question:

Assuming you'll set the camera correctly (I think that the three samples are underexposed) the 7D Mk II should allow you to take photographs as good (without intense pixel peeping) as the 80D you sold, when edited correctly.

The old camera will take excellent pictures, too, when set correctly, but might not be as good when you make prints 20 x 30 and bigger.

But the one to buy now is the current model, with a warranty, 7D Mk II, and a battery grip.

BAK

What happens to your photos?

Do players buy 11 x 14 inch prints? Does a local newspaper run pictures a full page wide?

Do the photos show up on local television programs, 1900 pixels wide on television screens of all sizes? Do people look at pictures 2400 pixels wide on big computer monitors?

Are there 1 x 1.5 meter prints hanging in a community indoor shopping mall?

The end use is a major factor in assessing picture quality.
BAK

I think the 80D and 7D2 outputs a similar look, as far as overall sharpness, and noise, especially higher ISO. I did think the 7D2 was a little better with AF, but I thought it was really close especially in low light. As others have mentioned, you may be forced to make a compromise based on your past experience with the 6D's IQ.

From trying one photographing basketball and then switching to my 1DMKIV I will stick with the MkIV.

AutoFocus is better and more reliable. Same lens, same settings, same light in the gym. Images from under the basket shooting into the shadow side of faces and bodies as well as images from eye level with the basket from the side in the stands. Each look good but more keepers with the MkIV. Shooting at ISO6400 and they look good. RAW images only, don't know about Jpegs.

Bak, i did everything correct , as i do with my 6D, however i don´t know if the cause is to be inside a arena, the autofocus is terrible slow in 80D. My best volleyball pictures are still taken with my 6D like this one


Thanks a lot!

Carlos Leão

I sell my pictures to somenewspapers here in Portugal, however as i told you, the best shots are still with the 6D, so i didn´t sell any picture taken with the 80D because i really don´t like them.

Best regards.


Carlos Leão

Yes, i´m considering to wait more 5 ou 6 months, to save money to get a Canon 1Dx, even in second hand.

Thanks a lot!

Carlos Leão

Thanks a lot!!

Carlos Leão

I have used the 7dII pretty heavily for indoor sports (boxing) and it's pretty good IMO.

I am assuming that it would have a bit in common with volleyball and that is horrible indoor lighting.

I do not like to go past ISO 6400.

One thing I have found very useful is the anti flicker. It is very effective.

The focus system is very good and will make your 6D seem like it is from the Flintstones in comparison.

Can not comment on the 1D, but have no problem recommending the 7DII.

Here are a couple of high ISO shots that may help.

Also here is a review I wrote. I doubt it will add anything to what you have researched, but it may be of help/

By the words, "i did everything correct," do you mean you went into Photoshop and adjusted the levels, and/or went to your cameras controls and adjusted the settings, before you posted the pictures in your original message?

Or do you mean something else?

Anyway, I went and looked at your 6D picture, and then I went and got one of your original 80D pictures from your original message, and put the 80D shot back into Photoshop, and made the same kind of adjustments as I did earlier today.

And the levels-adjusted 80D picture is better than you your 6D picture, as posted.

That said, the 6D picture is a really good sports picture.

If you send JPG frames of your good sports pictures to a newspaper, it is very likely the newspaper's photo editor can improve the pictures without violating any of the ethical rules about editing and retouching.

So do not be unwilling to submit pictures with good action and interest, just because the camera is not set properly or there's noise at ISO 6400. By the time the picture is printed, it will be fine.

And, still, the 7D II is a better choice than a 6 year old used camera.

And don't forget the battery grip.

BAK