Upgrade camera or lens?

I love shooting sports action and wildlife.

I having been using my current setup for more more than 6 years. I feel I am ready for an upgrade.

My current setup includes

- Canon 70D

- Canon 55-250

- Canon 10-18

Should I go for a new camera and a new lens?

I had sony A6400 with sony 70-350 f4.5-6.3 on my mind. Mirrorless seems like the obvious choice to go for now.

Or if it is better to get a new canon lens?

Here are some of my best shots so far

What are you missing right now and wish you camera can do better? You should be driven by needing something more from your current set up.

gavin said:

What are you missing right now and wish you camera can do better? You should be driven by needing something more from your current set up.

Click to expand...

- Autofocus speed
- Corners are soft (If I miss a frame, cannot recompose in post because of the soft corners)
- FPS
- sometimes buffer speed

I am a hobby photographer, so I am not looking for a fancy setup, I have my current setup for more than 6-7 years.

Sony expenses scare me. Buying any other lens later will be super expensive right!

But sony seems to be a great choice now from what I read

You current camera is pretty old so any current version is much faster and have improved AF. I only use Canon so the 90D would be the new version for you. My 5DIV is about same speed as your 70D and it works fine for action. I find that you have to get used to each sport so you know where and when to take the shots. If you want a mirrorless Canon also has new mirrorless and the R6 is suppose to be great.

The soft corners means better lens. However for sports I find that your subject tend to be in the middle so it does not matter as much for me. There are some good 3rd party lenses if you don't want to spend $$$. I would suggest a better lens.

--
My photos are at https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinz

gavin said:

You current camera is pretty old so any current version is much faster and have improved AF. I only use Canon so the 90D would be the new version for you. My 5DIV is about same speed as your 70D and it works fine for action. I find that you have to get used to each sport so you know where and when to take the shots. If you want a mirrorless Canon also has new mirrorless and the R6 is suppose to be great.

The soft corners means better lens. However for sports I find that your subject tend to be in the middle so it does not matter as much for me. There are some good 3rd party lenses if you don't want to spend $$$. I would suggest a better lens.

Click to expand...

I only drawback with a new lens is cropfactor
if I buy a 70-200 i am stuck at 112-320
If I need even a little close ups like5 meters or so 112 wont help at all

thats a huge dilemma I am in right now

I use the 100-400 for open field sports. You can also change lens for different type of shots. From my experience once you know each sport and figure out the good location for each kind of shot, you will use the right lens for that. You can also walk back if you need a wider view but open field sports are normally very far away from action. I tend to take closer action shot vs the larger group that you have posted.

Probably depends on how much money you want to spend. Your shots are nice, but shallower depth of field would help in most all of them.

Do you shoot mostly in daylight?

I would be tempted to pick up good deals on a 90D and a gently used 70-200mm f/2.8 (version I, II or III) and that would get you a long way forward without much $$.

If you want to buy new stuff, then R6 would be a nice body to mirrorless with.

I think you will see the biggest difference at this point with at least one faster lens (70-200mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8) and if you don't want to spend a lot, I would just add that to your 7D.

Intermediate cost would be the 90D with a used 70-200 f/2.8.

Higher end would be the R6 + RF 70-200mm or 100-500mm.

richardperson said:

Probably depends on how much money you want to spend. Your shots are nice, but shallower depth of field would help in most all of them.

Do you shoot mostly in daylight?

I would be tempted to pick up good deals on a 90D and a gently used 70-200mm f/2.8 (version I, II or III) and that would get you a long way forward without much $$.

If you want to buy new stuff, then R6 would be a nice body to mirrorless with.

I think you will see the biggest difference at this point with at least one faster lens (70-200mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8) and if you don't want to spend a lot, I would just add that to your 7D.

Intermediate cost would be the 90D with a used 70-200 f/2.8.

Higher end would be the R6 + RF 70-200mm or 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

I will try to find a used 90D and 70-200 f2.8 lens

I can get a sony A7iii and tamron 70-180 f2.8 for maybe 20% extra of the cost of 90D and canon 70-200 f2.8

Would that be a better option? Since i have read since tamron does not have any stabilization and sonys inbody stabilization wont we of much help at the long end?

Maybe you are looking at the old Tamron 70-200MM 2.8. The G2 -- current model -- has outstanding vibration control/stabilization. You'll turn that off for sports, of course, but it's nice to have in a pinch. I'm a Nikon guy so I can't help with your system choice -- but that Tamron is a fine lens for the price. I've used one and was very impressed.

shantanujoglekar said:

richardperson said:

Probably depends on how much money you want to spend. Your shots are nice, but shallower depth of field would help in most all of them.

Do you shoot mostly in daylight?

I would be tempted to pick up good deals on a 90D and a gently used 70-200mm f/2.8 (version I, II or III) and that would get you a long way forward without much $$.

If you want to buy new stuff, then R6 would be a nice body to mirrorless with.

I think you will see the biggest difference at this point with at least one faster lens (70-200mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8) and if you don't want to spend a lot, I would just add that to your 7D.

Intermediate cost would be the 90D with a used 70-200 f/2.8.

Higher end would be the R6 + RF 70-200mm or 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

I will try to find a used 90D and 70-200 f2.8 lens

I can get a sony A7iii and tamron 70-180 f2.8 for maybe 20% extra of the cost of 90D and canon 70-200 f2.8

Click to expand...

that lens looks like a good deal for the money, maybe post to the sony full frame forum to see how people like the focusing speed.

slow aperture on a crop body isn't ideal for sports, but the sony 70-350 has xd linear af motors, it's 20fps af-c capable on the a9:

http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp...ilce9/continuousshooting/en/index.html?id=spt

i'd pair it with a crop body that has sony real-time tracking capability, which the a7iii doesn't have, so far.

do you own the 100-400 lens that was used to take those pics you posted? if so, it's a good reason for sticking with canon.

shantanujoglekar said:

Would that be a better option? Since i have read since tamron does not have any stabilization and sonys inbody stabilization wont we of much help at the long end?

Click to expand...

you won't need stabilization at the 1/2000th shutter speed you were shooting at.

I you shoot in daylight and don't need the reach, the Canon 18-135 NanoUSM is a good lens with super fast AF and would satisfy the wide angle needs. But depending on how close you can get to the field, that can be a issue on the telephoto side of things

MILC man said:

shantanujoglekar said:

richardperson said:

Probably depends on how much money you want to spend. Your shots are nice, but shallower depth of field would help in most all of them.

Do you shoot mostly in daylight?

I would be tempted to pick up good deals on a 90D and a gently used 70-200mm f/2.8 (version I, II or III) and that would get you a long way forward without much $$.

If you want to buy new stuff, then R6 would be a nice body to mirrorless with.

I think you will see the biggest difference at this point with at least one faster lens (70-200mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8) and if you don't want to spend a lot, I would just add that to your 7D.

Intermediate cost would be the 90D with a used 70-200 f/2.8.

Higher end would be the R6 + RF 70-200mm or 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

I will try to find a used 90D and 70-200 f2.8 lens

I can get a sony A7iii and tamron 70-180 f2.8 for maybe 20% extra of the cost of 90D and canon 70-200 f2.8

Click to expand...

that lens looks like a good deal for the money, maybe post to the sony full frame forum to see how people like the focusing speed.

slow aperture on a crop body isn't ideal for sports, but the sony 70-350 has xd linear af motors, it's 20fps af-c capable on the a9:

http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp...ilce9/continuousshooting/en/index.html?id=spt

i'd pair it with a crop body that has sony real-time tracking capability, which the a7iii doesn't have, so far.

do you own the 100-400 lens that was used to take those pics you posted? if so, it's a good reason for sticking with canon.

MILC man said:

Would that be a better option? Since i have read since tamron does not have any stabilization and sonys inbody stabilization wont we of much help at the long end?

Click to expand...

you won't need stabilization at the 1/2000th shutter speed you were shooting at.

Click to expand...

I dont own the 100-400 sadly! I had rented.

I am inclined to save up and buy the R6 now, Does that make any sense to do that?.

Shifting to Sony, I am a bit hesitant. Sony lenses are so much more expensive and there isnt a good used market for Sony products in India. I can easily get decent used canon lenses.

the world market is swamped with canon dslr lenses, because so many people already left for sony mirrorless, and now for canon milc.

so a lot of ef-mount bargains, and they'll work better on rf-mount than ef-mount to some extent, you'll have eyeaf and such, with no need for that awful dslr micro-af adjustment.

just be aware that only some canon dslr lenses perform at their best on rf-mount bodies, see page 896 of the r5 manual, many of the 1st-gen/2nd-gen ef-mount lenses are not supported at 12fps af-c: https://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/5/0300039495/02/eosr5-ug2-en.pdf

r6 will have similar limitations, but it gets you in the milc game... downside is that canon is releasing weird rf lenses that aren't useful for sports, like 600mm f/11 and 800mm f/11.

canon still wants you to buy dslrs for sports, which has been a dead end for awhile now, while a9/a9ii 20fps af-c performance proved that milc is the way to go.