catchlight

<p>Your decision might hinge on the kind of photography you mainly plan to do.<br>

The 1D Mark II was the preferred body of professional sports and wildlife photographers several years ago because of its 8 fps rate, outstanding focus tracking for its time, 1/16000 sec. maximum shutter speed, and its reliability and ruggedness under tough conditions. I still love using mine because of its great responsiveness, handling, and customized programability.<br>

Having at least two batteries and a Canon NC-E2 charger included in the deal will be a plus, as will some assurance that the body hasn't been overused or abused.<br>

You have an opportunity to move up from a consumer body to a legendary pro camera, but the 1D Mark II might be more weight and complexity than some shooters want to deal with.</p>

<p>It might be worth checking if a micro four thirds system would give you acceptable image quality. A friend who does very long hikes says that unless he pixel peeps, his Panasonic GX-7 and a long Leica-made telephoto does an adequate job compared to his Nikon D3 and pro lenses.</p>

<p>I owned an original 5D, and now have a Mark II, and agree with Puppy Face. Either is good, but the Mk II is more refined. There are lots of gently used Mk IIs out there now since the Mk III came out, and the prices have come down.</p>

<p>Consider getting the 70-200/4L and 1.4X for your outdoor needs, then putting the money you save toward an 85/1.8 or the outstanding 135/2 for indoors (or anywhere).<br>

Also, I've shot thousands of frames with my non-IS 70-200/2.8 and have never felt the need for IS, so you might be able to save some more $$$ there.</p>

<p>Good post, Dan. Hyperbole, indeed!</p>

<p>I shoot dance and sports with a 5DMkII and a 1DMkII, and with proper technique they will both focus accurately and freeze action well. The 5D's better IQ and high ISO performance usually make it my preferred body, while the 1D's higher fps rate and weathersealing make it the better choice on other occasions.<br /> Signed,<br />"A greater fool".</p>

<p>I've used a 5D MkII for three years at up to 3200 ISO, and think it is a great camera. It's selling at a big discount now, enabling you to afford an excellent "L" series lens with the difference in price between it and the Mark III. </p>

<p>The MkII is often bundled with the EF24-105 f4 IS lens at a bargain price, too. There might even be some Black Friday bargains online or in stores today. Pay the extra for the new body if you like, but the MkII will do an excellent job of all the types of shooting you describe.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>With respect, I suggest you read this, especially the Ansel Adams quote:<br>

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm<br>

Photography is about seeing, feeling, and shooting -- not comparing specs and shopping.</p>

<p>Think Tank makes excellent rain covers in different lengths.</p>

<p>http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/hydrophobia-70-200-rain-cover.aspx</p>

<p>Dan, Steven King pretty well summed it up, but I'd like to add a few suggestions. Try shooting near the baseline at the side of the opposing team's basket (so your team's players are facing you) with the 50mm f1.8 wide open or close to it. Be sure to switch to the other side of the key as necessary to avoid the ref who's down low, who will be in your shot. Try to time your shots or bursts to capture players at the top of their jump, whether shooting or rebounding, as they are relatively motionless then, which means you will likely freeze the action, often at peak moments with the ball in the shot. And that money you were willing to spend on a Speedlite would buy you a mint/used 85/1.8 to give you some versatility. Hope this helps.</p>

<p>I have one of these and like it quite well. It's held a 5D MkII and 70-200/2.8 without problems, with a lightweight Acratech ballhead.</p>

<p>http://www.feisol.net/rapid-tripods-elite-tripods-c-1_10.html</p>

<p>I had the Canon 100-400mm, and used it for outdoor sports and wildlife. I soon realized, though, that I was using the 400mm focal length nearly all the time, so I replaced it with the cheaper, lighter, sharper Canon 400mm/f5.6. Your use may be different, but it's probably worth checking in case the prime and its advantages would work better for you. Artie Morris (Birds as Art) says the Canon 400/5.6 is the best lens you can get for shooting birds in flight handheld.</p>

<p>Jasna, it won't answer all your questions but, if you haven't done so already, check Rob Galbraith's database on card/camera performance:</strong><br /> http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007<br /> The 1DMkII is included, and I suspect the 30D data might be close to that of the 20D</p>

<p>Dean, you could do that, but it would be quite labour-intensive, time-consuming, and possibly expensive, and would yield poorer images, because of the vagaries of the scanning process. You would also lose out on the brilliant advantages that digital photography offers over film:<br /> 1. Shooting RAW, which allows you +/- two f-stops of exposure adjustment when necessary, and the ability to set white balance after you shoot;<br /> 2. Histogram reference before and after you shoot, as well as instant review to check composition, exposure, focus, and pretty well everything else that's crucial;<br /> 3. The ability to back up your work instantly, which is great when you are shooting a non-repeatable event such as a wedding, or when you are traveling.<br /> 4. Speed of processing, especially when you are working to deadlines. You can transmit files directly from the field, and don't have to depend on a lab for anything.<br /> 5. There's more, as I'm sure others will point out.</p>

<p>In my experience, hockey is easier to shoot than BBall or VBall, because arenas are generally more brightly lit than gyms, enabling an f2.8 zoom to work well. It may just be the reflectivity of the ice compared to a wood floor. </p>

<p>I just did a quick check in the Buy and Sell forum on www.fredmiranda.com, and lightly-used Nikon D3 bodies are going for $3000 to $3300.</p>

<p>John, to freeze the action in indoor sports like basketball, you need a shutter speed of at least 1/500 for players moving toward you, and 1/1000 of a second for players crossing your field of view. The way most high school and many college gyms are lit, that requires a lens with a maximum aperture of f2 or better, which means a prime lens, not a zoom.</p>

<p>If you can position yourself behind the baseline to one side of the basket, you can get great shots of the action in the paint with an inexpensive 50mm/f1.8 or a mid-priced 50mm/1.4 lens. When there's a stoppage of play, shift to the side of the key away from the low referee, or his butt will be in every shot. If you shoot at the top of the players' jumps for shots and rebounds, the players are nearly still, which improves your chances of a sharp image.</p>

<p>An 85/1.8, 100/2 or 135/2 is also great for action in your end of the court, shot from the baseline or sometimes the corner. My 200/2 is outstandingly sharp and fast, but it's too long for shooting from courtside. Shooting from the stands is not a good vantage point in most gyms for several reasons.</p>

<p>A frame rate of 8fps is also handy for short bursts of 3 shots or so to improve your chances of getting publishable shots, although 5fps will do.</p>

<p>The same lenses are also good for volleyball, if you can shoot from near the net on the referee's side, not the linesman's. The 50mm lens can get good shots of net action on your side of the court, and the 85, 100 or 135 can cover the other side. If you have to shoot from farther back, the 200/2 is superb, but they cost close to $5000.</p>

<p>Some gyms have two lighting intensities. If you can persuade the home coach to crank it up the higher level (in exchange for lots of free publicity shots), you usually gain 1 f-stop, the difference between 1/250 and 1/500, or 1/500 and 1/1000.</p>

<p>I shoot Canon, but acknowledge that the top Nikon bodies have had about a one-stop edge in usable ISO for a few years, especially with the D3. You can now get a used D3 in excellent condition on www.fredmiranda.com for a reasonable price. Canon's 1 Series bodies are certainly adequate. (Note that advertised ISO claims do not mean much). I've used a 1DMkII for years, and the noise level becomes excessive above 1600ISO. Noise from my 5DMkII is acceptable up to 2400ISO, about the same as the 1DMkIII and MkIV, but the 5D frame rate is slower. My friend's D3 is usable to 3200ISO.</p>

<p>Hope this helps. </p>

<p>It's one thing to capture some good images using your new gear, it's another to get the most out of them in postprocessing, especially if you are shooting RAW. </p>

<p>I suggest you save enough money to buy Adobe Lightroom so you can optimize your photos, develop a logical filing/keyword system, and print them without issues.</p>

<p>You can download a demo copy at www.adobe.com, and search the net for an easy to use workflow to apply to each image.</p>

<p>Wow! Some fresh-looking swimming shots, William. Ditto on the Canon 15mm. That lens is a lot of fun, but also a serious tool.</p>

<p>Adam, first let me congratulate you on living in Montreal, one of my favourite cities. Our daughter attends McGill, and I find lots of reasons to go and visit her from here on Vancouver Island. <br>

I sold my 5D a year ago and replaced it with a 5D MkII. I do a lot of theatrical, concert, and dance shooting and am impressed by the improved low light performance of the MkII over both the original 5D and my 1DMkII. The bigger LCD is also great, I'm glad to have video capabilities, and I love those huge RAW files--especially when I need to crop.<br>

I shot with film for many years and am really happy to be back to using a full-frame body as the norm, where the focal length of every lens is exactly what's written on the side of it. As much as I like my 1DMkII, I only take it along now to events like surfing and ski racing that require a high frame rate and weather sealing.<br>

There are usually a few low actuation 5DMkII's on the Fred Miranda buy and sell forum, and you can tell by the seller's feedback and forum posts what he's been doing with the body he has for sale (pro vs. amateur, etc.).<br>

Good hunting!</p>

<p>Justin, it's hard to know exactly what went wrong without seeing some images. <br>

One crucial question is whether you made a copy of the original files before editing them, or whether you kept the CF cards with the images untouched. If so, you can always get a postprocessing expert to diagnose what's wrong, and fix the shots as much as possible, or work on them yourself when you have more experience with the software.</p>

<p>It's a trade-off among the "older" bodies: the 5-series cams generally offer better IQ for stationary subjects, and the 1-series are better for freezing subjects that are moving, especially if they are moving fast. </p>

<p>Let your photographic purpose inform your choice.</p>

<p>Arthur, your mention of the Old Port in Quebec City brings back memories of Robert Lepage's spectacular projection, The Image Mill, on the grain elevators just after dark every evening two summers ago. The people standing near us, nearly all Quebecois, were moved by his presentation of Francophone history and culture, as were we.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, we were there a week late for Paul McCartney's free concert on the Plains of Abraham. It was fun, though, to stay in an old stone B&B in the shadow of the Chateau Frontenac and walk the Old Town, battlefield, and modern city every day. QC compliments Montreal nicely for photographic opportunities.</p>

<p>I shoot a lot of theatrical and dance performances, and the 5DMkII is the best Canon body I've used for capturing action in low light conditions with acceptable levels of noise. It definitely surpasses my 1DMkII.</p>

<p>The newest 1D series bodies may be even better, especially with their high fps rates, but I haven't used them.</p>

<p>Charles, pardon my low-tech question if it's too simplistic, but were you using a lens hood?</p>

<p>We stayed on the Plateau two blocks from Schwartz's last year. Most days there was a lineup to even get into the place and tie into one of those politically incorrect mountains of smoked meat. </p>