camera upgrade question

Hi all. I am not a total beginner but am still relatively new to this and have a Canon EOS Rebel SL1. I take mainly event photos at parties and church events. I have gotten paid for my work (hurray for that!) so now I am thinking maybe it is time to upgrade the camera, just the body for now. What would people suggest as a good upgrade? I would like to stay in the Canon EOS compact sensor line. I don't want to have to buy all new lenses all at once as the money would be a problem. I have 3 lenses, an EF 40 mm fixed, an EF-S 18-55 and an EF-S 18-135. I have been looking at the Canon EOS 7D online but am not sure I can afford it. Any suggestions would be great.

I'm no Canon expert, bought my 1st this year.

Even the 7D Mk II is getting a bit old / is reaching the end of it's model cycle? If money is an issue I'd always try to save by buying used.

How about the 80D? (Or an used 70D?) Both seem to offer a desirable multitude of AF spots, that hopefully work better than what you have right now.

As I am understanding the 7D II it is intended as a professional grade sports & birding body. Do you really need 10FPS to machine gun down events?

The trick of growing a well stuffed bag on a budged is to avoid super big investments in camera bodies. - Yes, it is nice & important to have 2. But a pair of big flash guns and maybe even some stabilized f2.8 zoom(s) want to be bought too.

Don't let getting paid for a few pictures go to your head!

 

Sit down and list what exactly is lacking in your current camera that you need to upgrade.

 

Better autofocus? Are you missing focus on many shots?

 

Better ISO speed or less noise? Is the camera struggling in your usual lighting conditions?

 

More shooting speed (FPS)? Are you missing shots while the camera is storing images?

 

More resolution? Are you missing fine detail at your usual print or display size?

 

The above are some of the questions you need to ask and answer before leaping to spend money on a new camera.

 

Also consider whether a faster lens might not be a better "investment". (In general a new camera body will lose you money unless you're regularly earning from your photography.)

The main problem I am having right now is that I am often inside a church, in low light, and people are moving. They don't move fast, but they do move. The lights are also usually tungsten. The use of flash is forbidden. The type of shot I am having the most issues with is the ones (like in a wedding) where I am standing at the head of the main aisle, and people are walking up the aisle towards me. I try to stand at a bit of an angle so as not to be straight on. I am getting some poor autofocus on those. I have a very steady hand so that's not really the problem. I am not sure what the problem is but I started looking at my camera and thought maybe that was it. The lens I use the most is an f 3.5, the 18-135 mm. The zoom range is nearly perfect for what I need but perhaps it is too slow also. I also take a lot of outdoor scenery, in the woods, biking shots etc. but those are more for my personal enjoyment.

Shooting moving subjects in low light (especially tungsten) is always going to be a challenge and higher performance cameras and lenses will usually provide better results. That being said, I would think that the latest generation of Canon APSC cameras (24mp, duel pixel live view, and 45 focus points through viewfinder) would be a significant improvement over what you are currently using. The latest 24mp sensor has better high ISO performance and dynamic range than the SL1, and both the in viewfinder AF system and live view should be a significant improvement. It is likely that using the live view tracking system may be, for what you described, better than any other method currently available on Canon DSLRS. The latest cameras to have theses features are the 80D, T7i and 77D, with the T7i the least expensive.

 

Faster zoom lenses are not inexpensive, so if you need a faster lens for a reasonable cost, you may want to look into another Prime lens, like the EF 35 f2, of EF 50 f1.8,

Trying to piece things together: From a recent German review I recall they considered EOS entry level 9 spot AF inferior to Nikon's 3000 series. I'm not sure what kind of AF spots are used. - Cross sensors everywhere? What is their sensitivity? Try to dig specs for what you have and all (4 so far?) candidates. I tend to rely on dpreview's reviews to get an imagination of AF and of course low light performance too. Tony & Chelsea Northrup on Youtube seem to make budged conscious reviews too.

Absence of lens speed does add to AF problems indoors. My (not contemporary!) Fuji system feels close to unusable there.

I believe I read /saw that Canon AF depends on us to track the subjects and point a single AF spot where we need it. At least thats what I got out of Jared Polin's 6D Mk II review on Youtube. - AF should be the same as in 80D. (Once again: I am new to Canon and started from the other end, with so far only a 5D IV & 70- 200 f2.8, which seem to perform quite well. - Next time I'll use them I'll refrain from using AF clusters which apparently broke half of my neck during a recent sports event. - Luckily I overshot it so no harm done.)

I agree with Ken above just want to remind:

I have a very steady hand

could also mean: "IS is awesome!" both impressions grow on the same tree.

I shot a lot of low light trash* recently with my non stabilized Monochrom and fast(ish) primes. and with fast primes on Pentax / Samsung IBIS DSLRs before. My conclusions:

• Image stabilization is awesome! & I should keep my shutter speed above 1/250sec to get stunning tack sharp results with a 90mm without stabilization.
  
• Fast glass is no cure all. while it helps AF (to some extend) and can render dreamy bokehlicious portraits in good light, a picture of 2 people with just one of their 4 eyes in focus usually doesn't look that good.
  

In a handheld non sportive situation you need lenses a whole lot faster than your stabilized ones to compensate for the lack of IS.

The main problem I am having right now is that I am often inside a church, in low light, and people are moving. . . . The use of flash is forbidden. The type of shot I am having the most issues with is the ones (like in a wedding) where I am standing at the head of the main aisle, and people are walking up the aisle towards me. I try to stand at a bit of an angle so as not to be straight on. I am getting some poor autofocus on those. . . .

 

Are you certain that 'poor auto focus; is the problem, or the ONLY problem.

 

In my experience, "Poor Auto Focus" has many times been blamed for the blur caused by Subject Movement. Notwithstanding that fact; using manual pre-focus is one technique to address the shooting scenario of the Bridal Party's Processional and Recessional when Flash is prohibited. There are other techniques.

 

I am not suggesting that you should not buy a new camera body, or may be just another lens; or maybe no purchase is necessary at all: what I am suggesting is that the correct identification of ALL the technical issues (including photographer's technique) is paramount and initial, before you spend any money.

 

One or two sample images displaying the problems that you are having (images with EXIF), will assist in a comprehensive diagnosis and better illustrate the shooing scenarios that you encounter; thus probably rendering much better targeted assistance.

 

WW

Fast glass is no cure all. while it helps AF (to some extend) and can render dreamy bokehlicious portraits in good light, a picture of 2 people with just one of their 4 eyes in focus usually doesn't look that good.

Just to add that fastest apertures *use* to be far from optimal, so the OP should notice that it may result on some added image softness, too.

---

BTW, when I read things self related to the ability of the user to hand hold, "II have a very steady hand so that's not really the problem"... (no pun intended), I use to believe that the main problem actually is camera shake, that is, a slower than the proper shutter speed.

Post a sample pic; let us know your settings to tell where the problem is.

Edited August 31, 2017 by jose_angel

Shutter speeds faster than 1/125th under artificial lighting are problematic. Mains powered lighting flickers 120 (or in europe 100) times per second and can cause uneven exposure and/or colour at faster speeds. Therefore image stabilisation or a camera support is an extremely good idea.

 

One of the first things I'd put on my shopping list is a tripod or monopod. No matter how steady I consider my hands.

 

Taking a custom White Balance setting will also save a lot of post processing work too.

If your problems stem from shutter speed rather than auto focus issues, I agree with others here that a faster lens is going to be a better solution to your problem.

 

You don't have to purchase a camera body completely on speculation that it will solve your problem. I recommend renting one instead and trying it out. This is a very low cost way to make sure you're getting what you actually need before spending hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. The same is true with lenses. You will also find that quality L-series (if you stick with Canon) lenses will give you a crisper, better image than the cheaper kit lenses will. There's a reason those lenses are more money.

 

And not to be too brazen, but I actually have a book on getting started in wedding photography if you're interested. You can get it cheaper through my web site directly, but you can find it on Amazon as well. It's called Balancing the Art and Business of Wedding Photography. My web site page for it is www.chadwick.photography/press

Edited August 31, 2017 by michaelchadwickphotography

A lens like the 18-135 is f/3.5 at 18mm, quickly drops to f/4 and is f/5.6 at the long end. That is quite a difference, and shooting with f/5.6 in low light will make life hard on any AF system. The autofocus sensor sits behind the lens, so the more light the lens lets through (*), the better AF can do its work. In other words: fast(er) lenses do not only have the benefit of being able to keep shorter shutterspeeds, they also actually can improve AF performance.

 

A wide range like 18 to 135 is very convenient, but they do present a compromise, and lenses with a smaller zoomrange typically will perform better. Faster lenses near always have a lot smaller zoom ranges. That seems a sacrifice, but one gets used to it - you just have to move a bit more, and/or plan ahead better. Sure, the convenience helps being ready for a wide range of shots, but I also see a lot of people staying in one position and use the zoom to frame only - while moving around a bit will make you study different compositions much more.

Do you know any other photographer that might have a f/2.8 zoom you could borrow for one shoot, to see if that makes the difference or not?

 

_____

 

(*) there is an optimum, though, so from ~f/2.8 on, AF action does not become significantly faster (and the need for precision higher), plus it also depends how fast the motor in the lens can perform the action. Kit lenses are no speed demons.

Thank you everyone who replied here. I have learned a great deal just from these replies. I am definitely working on skills and studying. I am going to move my topic that is here completely over to the thread I put under Canon as it's now gotten mostly into specific Canon camera model options at this point. BTW I have a tripod (the church I am usually in does not want it used there because it gets too in the way), my zoom lenses are both EF-S f3.5 IS STM, the church has required that they do not want a lot of movement during services, and any movement patterns have to be only in restricted routes which they specify. I have a Canon Speedlite 430-EXIIIRT but cannot use it in there either. I have looked into faster zoom lenses and while I would love to get a few right now I think the budget will have to wait for those. P.S. I am not complaining about the church, I respect everything they do and it's my church! I love taking photographs in there for events. Edited August 31, 2017 by annft212

The OP has purchased a 77D