# Looking for some input



## heyitsme (Mar 31, 2017)

I'm interested in buying a new Canon camera. I would say max price cost would be $2000. I've only had one other camera that I've been using for the past decade, Canon Powershot S5IS. As far as what I photograph, since it's only a hobby and not a profession, I mostly capture friends/family. I like to capture natural emotions in a casual environment. I am interested in doing portrait photography. I also have nieces in sports that I like to photograph as well. So to get a photo of movement and be able to get it in fine detail would be amazing. Also, like to play in macro mode. I have been teaching myself to adjust ISO, f/stops, and shutter speeds. I still have a lot to learn of course. In my brief research, I thought the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, Canon EOS 6D, and Canon EOS 5D Mark III sounded pretty good. But really, would like an opinion on anything that may fit what I mentioned even if it's not those three. Thanks!


----------



## beagle100 (Mar 31, 2017)

heyitsme said:


> I'm interested in buying a new Canon camera. I would say max price cost would be $2000. I've only had one other camera that I've been using for the past decade, Canon Powershot S5IS. As far as what I photograph, since it's only a hobby and not a profession, I mostly capture friends/family. I like to capture natural emotions in a casual environment. I am interested in doing portrait photography. I also have nieces in sports that I like to photograph as well. So to get a photo of movement and be able to get it in fine detail would be amazing. Also, like to play in macro mode. I have been teaching myself to adjust ISO, f/stops, and shutter speeds. I still have a lot to learn of course. In my brief research, I thought the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, Canon EOS 6D, and Canon EOS 5D Mark III sounded pretty good. But really, would like an opinion on anything that may fit what I mentioned even if it's not those three. Thanks!



wow, been using the Canon Powershot S5 for the last 10 years

yes, the 5D3 would be a good upgrade
or a 6D or the future 6D2 or maybe a 5D4  or a used 1DX
be sure to include the lens in your budget

heck, even the crop mirrorless cameras are a good upgrade
*www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless*


----------



## DGMPhotography (Mar 31, 2017)

I'd be happy to point you in the right direction if you have any interest in Nikon


----------



## heyitsme (Mar 31, 2017)

beagle100 said:


> heyitsme said:
> 
> 
> > I'm interested in buying a new Canon camera. I would say max price cost would be $2000. I've only had one other camera that I've been using for the past decade, Canon Powershot S5IS. As far as what I photograph, since it's only a hobby and not a profession, I mostly capture friends/family. I like to capture natural emotions in a casual environment. I am interested in doing portrait photography. I also have nieces in sports that I like to photograph as well. So to get a photo of movement and be able to get it in fine detail would be amazing. Also, like to play in macro mode. I have been teaching myself to adjust ISO, f/stops, and shutter speeds. I still have a lot to learn of course. In my brief research, I thought the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, Canon EOS 6D, and Canon EOS 5D Mark III sounded pretty good. But really, would like an opinion on anything that may fit what I mentioned even if it's not those three. Thanks!
> ...



It was my first 'real' camera. Then, I sort of lost the passion for photography, mostly because I started picking up the camera less and less. I didn't have confidence in my photography. But, now I'm back! I did know that lens would be separate, but admittedly did not fit that into my budget. Thank you for your help, I'll have to check out some of the other ones you mentioned!


----------



## heyitsme (Mar 31, 2017)

DGMPhotography said:


> I'd be happy to point you in the right direction if you have any interest in Nikon



I mean, I suppose I have to keep my options open. What would you suggest with the info I provided above?


----------



## weepete (Mar 31, 2017)

Hmmmm....What kind of sports do your nieces do?

Personally (though I have a feeling at the moment I'm not alone) I have a hard time recommending Canon's entry level cameras just now as the tech is just so far behind yhe market leaders. They will do BUT other brands can offer more performance at similar price ranges which is much more an advatage to a beginner or limited experience amatuer shooter. Especially when it comes to underexposure and ISO invariance which can be worked around most of the time by reasonably experienced shooters but really show their value when your are not used to shooting and say need 4 stops of recovery. If you choose canon as a system it's becoming quite important to get your exposures right, which is fine if you: a) have the experience or b) have time to review and correct your exposure. That's not to say Canon are bad as a brand (I am a canon shooter too BTW) but something you need to be aware of. 

Saying that your budget is pretty good so I'd expect to be buying in more the enthusiast range. I'd say an 80D with a 15-85mm f3.5-5.6, a couple of fast write speed lower capacity lexar or sandisk memory cards (its better to buy several lower capacity memory than one big one, as if one fails...)

Mind you that won't get you close to far away action and will be pretty poor in low light. So if that is a concern you want fast glass (think at least f4, more likely f2.8 or better) and bear in mind these lenses are not cheap. And no, there is no work around for low light (and by low light I mean anywhere inside a building), you need good quality fast glass. Depending on what focal length you need these can cost as much as your camera body to thousands more.

Body contenders are 80D, 7Dmkii, 6D I think a new 5D is out of budget when you add in a lens or two. Then save up for a 70-200mm L or greater.


----------



## heyitsme (Mar 31, 2017)

weepete said:


> Hmmmm....What kind of sports do your nieces do?
> 
> Personally (though I have a feeling at the moment I'm not alone) I have a hard time recommending Canon's entry level cameras just now as the tech is just so far behind yhe market leaders. They will do BUT other brands can offer more performance at similar price ranges which is much more an advatage to a beginner or limited experience amatuer shooter. Especially when it comes to underexposure and ISO invariance which can be worked around most of the time by reasonably experienced shooters but really show their value when your are not used to shooting and say need 4 stops of recovery. If you choose canon as a system it's becoming quite important to get your exposures right, which is fine if you: a) have the experience or b) have time to review and correct your exposure. That's not to say Canon are bad as a brand (I am a canon shooter too BTW) but something you need to be aware of.
> 
> ...




Competitive cheerleading (she's the flyer) and softball are their sports. Low light capability is a concern of mine, so I would need fast glass. I've never had to buy lens before, so I am fairly ignorant. How can I tell what would be a good quality fast glass? Thank you for all you help! Amazon.com : Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens : Camera & Photo
Is that a good lens?


----------



## weepete (Mar 31, 2017)

Ok, there's a few things to think about then. The first is that when you move from a bridge camera lenses get more spesific. We are at a weird stage just now where cameras and tech are advancing very quickly. But low light means high ISO, so in order to mitigate that a photographer needs to use "fast glass" or a wider aperture (yeah, it's counter intuative but it is a ratio so a lower F number lets in more light and  is "faster " but costs more but retains more value).

Low light photography needs good glass, and a decent body which are both expensive.  more focal length is yet more costly. 

What you are looking for is a two lens solutiom IMO but quslity lenses


----------



## heyitsme (Apr 5, 2017)

weepete said:


> Ok, there's a few things to think about then. The first is that when you move from a bridge camera lenses get more spesific. We are at a weird stage just now where cameras and tech are advancing very quickly. But low light means high ISO, so in order to mitigate that a photographer needs to use "fast glass" or a wider aperture (yeah, it's counter intuative but it is a ratio so a lower F number lets in more light and  is "faster " but costs more but retains more value).
> 
> Low light photography needs good glass, and a decent body which are both expensive.  more focal length is yet more costly.
> 
> What you are looking for is a two lens solutiom IMO but quslity lenses



Do you have any suggestions for fast glass lens, like a specific lens? If not, I still thank you for all of your help.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 5, 2017)

7D MkII


----------



## weepete (Apr 5, 2017)

Sure, the cheapest I could get it to was:

Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Zoom Lens AFA009C-700 B&H
And
Canon 80D EOS DSLR Camera (80D Camera Body) 1263C004 B&H Photo

The 50mm f1.8 aka the "nifty fifty" is an ok lens, and probably the cheapest "decent" quality you can get but it's too short a lot of the time for sports. Fast glass you are looking for is f2.8 and below. Quality glass tends to mean better built, sharper, generally from either Canon, Sigma or Tamron. Canon's L lenses tend to be the gold standard by which others are compared to but cost a chunk of change. That's the type of lens most people use for low light sports.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 5, 2017)

If you re-read Post #6....you'll look to an ISO invariant camera with a SONY-made sensor...maybe a Nikon D7200, or a Nikon D610, and a sensor that can be under-exposed by 4 full shutter speeds at the niece's sports events,and then the nearly-black exposures "lifted"in software...what weepete is telling you is that there are cameras that can allow the beginner or intermediate sports shooter a huge "crutch", or better a "lifeline"...but those are not Canon cameras.

As far as the $1,099 Tamron 70-200 VC lens...yeah...*pretty popular as a value lens buy*.

I can see a Nikon D610 full-frame sensor camera and an 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G as a good low-light/indoor sports rig with tremendous potential for cropping-in later, and maybe even better than a 70-200 f/2.8 zoom in the sense that the 85 is faster (f/1.8 vs f/2.8) and smaller, and lighter, and sharper. Nikon's 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G-series is one of *****the best***** lenses under $4,000 in terms of sharpness. It is a critically sharp, bitingly sharp, amazing lens for around $399 or so. And is the second- or third-sharpest lens tested out of 73 primes tested by DxO Mark.com. This is one of the best lens lengths to use on FF Nikon for cropping-in-on later, at the computer.

The Nikon D7200 and the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC lens would also be nice. Or the Nikon D7200 and the 85/1.8 AF-S G-series prime lens, and some cash left over for something else.

The other options include USED camera, or a refurbished camera, and maybe a used lens as well.


----------



## beagle100 (Apr 6, 2017)

heyitsme said:


> weepete said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmmm....What kind of sports do your nieces do?
> ...



good enough for many things .... but probably not sports 
*www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless*


----------



## DGMPhotography (Apr 15, 2017)

If you have $2000 to spend and need good low-light capabilities, then I would personally suggest the Nikon D750. It's a full frame camera, and thus you will never need to upgrade again until it breaks on you. You can get one refurbished for around $1,500. After that, get the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 ($180). Which will be good for portraits, and most indoor activities. It's the "nifty fifty," and called that for good reason. It's the best bang for your buck. And then if you need a longer lens for sports you could get the 70-300 f/3.5-5.6 ($250). It's not the most amazing lens, but as long as it's bright outside, it works pretty well. Plus, since you have the bigger, better camera, you would be able to crop more and get some extra zoom out of your shots. And you should just about be within your budget with all that.

Here's a shot I got with the D750 and the 70-300 lens.


----------



## beagle100 (Apr 15, 2017)

^^
if they shoot field hockey even a six year old Canon crop model (cheap!)  and an old original 100-400 (really cheap !) works fine


----------



## chuasam (Apr 17, 2017)

7D mk2. Then save more for the lenses


----------

