My daughter is about to begin Tee-ball. This will be my first experience with sports photography or any action photography for that matter. I have enough budget to buy a 70-200 2.8 and 1.4 extender. My only camera is a 5D. I will have a few hundered bucks left over after that. My question for those experienced with a 5D and 1D classic is would I be better off buying a rough 1D classic for sports or just saving my money and shooting the 5D. I know there are some pros and cons to each. I should see better ISO performance out of the 5D but experience better auto focus out of the 1D etc... I just wanted some opinons from those experienced with both.
I don't shoot Canon, but if the sport is tee ball I doubt autofocus will be an issue. The game itself will move fairly slow at that age.
My advice would be to save the cash, put it in savings (build it up over time) and upgrade as your daughter ages. As she gets older a better body might be advantageous, but right now IMHO you will be fine with a 5D and a 70-200......
I don't think ISO performance will be an issue for T-ball. They're not likely to be playing under the lights at that level.
Autofocus won't be an issue either. I know much has been said of the focusing system on the 5D, but let's be realistic - the camera can focus. You might not want to shoot NHL hockey with it, but T-ball? certainly. I've seen posts here from virtually every sport shot with the 5D. I personally don't think you want a dedicated body just for shooting T-ball (or any other activity she gets involved in). Picking up a lens like the 70-200 2.8 is something you are likely to find many other photographic uses for as well (school shows, family events, etc.). I've gotten so many great shots of my kids in their early years at school shows with that lens. Hook that baby up with your 5D at high ISO from the back row at the school show and your images will kick the stuffing out of the parents up front with their flashing P & S.
In my opinion, keep the body you have, pick up the lens and 1.4x and don't look back.
I agree with the other posters, I can't really see T-Ball being too demanding on the AF or on ISO for the reasons stated above. Buy the 70-200 2.8 and you'll be very happy, it's a great all around lens, I use mine all the time. As was also suggested by Trevorma, create a savings account and put a little away into there for when your daughter starts to get a little older and you need a higher end camera with better AF and ISO performance.
I used the 5D with a 70-200 F4 last season shooting my niece playing soccer. The games mostly started at sunset or night. The fields were relatively well lit but I was constantly driving the ISO up higher than I like and struggling with the autofocus/lack of experience using auto focus. I new a 1.4 tele was out of the question. This year I will be better equipped with a 2.8 and monopod.
As a side note, you may want to check out Noiseware Community Edition (it's free). I used the free version for several years until finally upgrading to Pro this fall. It does a great job of cleaning up noise and fits any budget ...
I used the 5D with a 70-200 F4 last season shooting my niece playing soccer. The games mostly started at sunset or night. The fields were relatively well lit but I was constantly driving the ISO up higher than I like and struggling with the autofocus/lack of experience using auto focus. I new a 1.4 tele was out of the question. This year I will be better equipped with a 2.8 and monopod.
Tony
To each his own, but unless you have a physical limitation, you probably won't need a monopod for the 70-200. I find it much more limiting to shoot with a monopod, and hand-hold my 100-400, which I believe is a bit heavier.
