70-200mm 2.8 lens or canon 20d

[ian_tennant]

I shoot a lot of sports action football (under lights), basketball

and track at 1600 ISO. I am shooting with a digital rebel, ef 75-300mm

f4-5.6 and a speedlite 550ex. To obtain a lighter and sharper image

do i upgrade to canon 20d or a ef 70-200mm IS f2.8 lens ?

 

I am unsure what to do, any advice

 

Many thanks

 

Ian

[chris_whitted]

The lens will make a bigger difference than the body will in image quality.

[bill_hildyard]

Me unless the rebel is limiting what you can capture, I'd get the lens, there will always be a better camera cheaper down the road.

[jonathon_schuster1]

good glass is forever, bodies come and go.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Get the lens. It's faster, which will help with your ISO (and may also help with focus acquisition). It's optically superior, which will help with sharpness. It has a vastly better autofocus system, which will focus more quickly.</p>

 

<p>The 20D would improve high-ISO noise levels (but so would lowering the ISO by using the faster lens, and the faster lens has other benefits). You'd also get the extra pixels but I doubt the number of pixels is the limiting factor for what you're doing.</p>

[andrew_carlson]

I was in your spot last fall, wanting to shoot hockey with an f/4 or 5.6 lens and the Drebel. I bought the 70-200 f/2.8L IS lens and while it did improve my shots they were still very dark so 2 weeks later I bought the 20D. I didn't like how the Drebel was limited with Servo-AF only in the creative/sports mode and by the time I hit the shutter the player was out of focus.

 

I am now shooting ice hockey at ISO 800 and no flash with that lens however and Love it. Could I have done it with the drebel? Yes but I love the combo of the 20D and that lens. So this probably doesn't help you much - sorry!

[lotsawa]

Well, if you shoot a lot, you should know what is your main limiting factor: lack of speed of the drebel, or the lack of speed (and IS) of your lens. As others have said, investment in good glass is more reasonable (provided the body works basically in the way you need it, of course).

 

I doubt Canon will produce an upgrade to the 70-200/2.8 IS 'cause it is quite a perfect lens, but there will be frequent upgrades to digital bodies. So the good lens will keep its value, and you might always upgrade later to another body (a 30D or whatsoever), when you can afford it.

 

BTW, there was also some discussion here in the forum wheter IS helps for action shots since it won't help you to freeze motion. But from all what I read the IS is such a useful feature that it is worth the extra bucks that you have to pay for it.

 

You should also know from your experience if 200mm instead of the 300mm of your current zoom is long enough for your kind of shooting. If not, you might add a 1.4x TC.

[robbquinn]

Another vote for the lens here. I was in the same boat except I have the 10D. I went for the lens and absolutely love it. I might upgrade cameras when the successor to the 20D comes out but that lens is fantastic and once you build up your arms muscles you won't even notice all of the weight. For sports action you will not regret buying the 70-200 2.8. I love the image stabilization on mine but it is probably not essential for everyone.

 

I also have the 75-300 USM, it's around somewhere...I think. I need to dig that thing out and sell it. Anyone interested? It is like new! :)

[grant g]

Preaching what I practiced...

 

In your situation, I got the 70-200IS first. And with the last round of stacking rebates, I wasn't going to get anything off the 20D. I haven't regretted it. Lack of AI Servo on anything but the 'sports' mode really sucks on the Drebel, enough so that I would sometimes use my backup D30 for things that move quickly.

 

The lens will still be worth ~$1,500 in a year or two unless canon releases an IS body in the meantime. The 20D will not. Which is also why I just picked up a used 1 year old 10D for 1/2 retail. I probably won't get a 20D until they fall under the $1,000 mark too. Especially since none of the battery grips that I have (BG-E1 & BG-ED3) will fit it.

 

And you know that IS doesn't help you freeze the action, right? I never use IS when shooting indoor sports. It just eats batteries.

[mark u]

A fast lens has to be your priority for this kind of shooting. In fact, you might want to consider f/2 or faster primes rather than the zoom, depending on the lighting. Flash is often not welcome at sport events, so you need to get action stopping shutter speeds through fast apertures and high ISO. You potentially have ISO 3200 to play with if you install hacked firmware which could come in handy inmore dimly lit venues. You wouldn't have any higher ISO by getting the 20D, while handicapping yourself by 2-3 stops through persisting with such a slow lens and also reducing the effectiveness of your flash in those situations where you are permitted to use it.

[Rob_L1664876404]

I'll throw one wrench in the gears, here. I have done a lot of low-light event photography with both the Digital Rebel and the 20D (I have both). I also own the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. I would be hard pressed to say, without a doubt, go for the lens. The difference in noise levels at the higher ISO's between the dReb and the 20D is very noticeable. Images out of the 20D at ISO 3200 are, in my opinion, better than those out of the 300D at 1600. You can make up for an f-stop in the ISO and delay the lens purchase. That way, you get better AI servo and a lot of speed difference with the 20D (much faster writing and clearing the buffer if you're shooting fast). The autofocus is also extremely fast. FWIW, I don't use flash in these settings...

[chuck_marunde]

I love my Canon f2.8 IS. Attached is a photo with no flash at 1600 ISO with Fuji 35mm. I just upgraded to a 20D body, and I'm in heaven.<div></div>

[carlos_santos2]

Skip the 20D, I'm sure there's still plenty coming as far as body improvements go (e.g. on-board dust reduction, bigger viewfinders, onboard IS, better dynamic range, even better noise reduction and ISO sensitivities); overall the 20D (for all the hype it gets from the noob's) has imho only addressed a couple of the "low-hanging fruit" problems remaining in terms of improvements over the 300D or 10D series (so it got faster burst and slightly bigger sensor sizes, woo hoo)..

 

Your money would be much better spent on glass (which is highly unlikely to improve substantially over the next couple years, glass is a refined and very expensive process that's much more in the plateau phase of improvement than are digital bodies).

 

Have you also thought aabout the 135 f/2L and 1.4x TC (for ~200mm f/2.8)?

 

Hockey may not be the best sport to shoot this with, but this combo lets you have somewhere in the short to mid telephoto range and the f/2 aperture can't be beat. Plus, it's a heck of a lot smaller than that 70-200 boat of a lens.

 

-cs

[bestactionshots]

With shooting HS sports, go with 20D and ditch 300D IMO.

[yakim_peled1]

I always thought that lenses are more important than the body. Consequently, I now have 5 primes but still shoot film :-(

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.