fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              end
  

Options to get more reach

  
 
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · Options to get more reach


bman212121 wrote:
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the OP needs to think about Electronic Shutter. They are using two mirror slappers right now, and the default setting of electronic first curtain shutter (EFCS) on the R5 is practically silent compared to a DSLR.


One of OP's criteria is improved AF performance over what they're getting with the 5DIV and 1DXII, and IMO, that means going mirrorless. If they do that eventually, e-shutter generally bypasses frame rate limitations of older adapted EF lenses, for example if they were to get an EF 300/2.8 IS v1. Otherwise yes, EFCS with newer EF lenses would provide frame rate performance similar to the 1DXII, yet much quieter.

More difficult to quantify is the difference in the viewfinder experience. When I shot sports with the 1DXII, the mirror blackout really didn't bother me and I was always able to easily follow fast sports action and could consistently time my shots. When I initially tried the R5 and R6 while deciding whether or not to transition to mirrorless, I found the EVF blackout in mechanical and EFCS bothersome in comparison, even though it shouldn't be very different from DSLR blackout. There was some element of lag in the EVF feed that when combined with the blackout threw me off and made it more difficult to precisely time shots. E-shutter was a better experience and the R5 was slightly better than the R6, but still laggy, combined with apparent still frame insertion that made it worse. It turn, the R6II was better than both of those, but still exhibited some discombobulating lagginess, that in turn has been virtually eliminated by the R5II. IME, the EVF experience shooting sports is more usable in e-shutter than EFCS, which IMO makes good e-shutter performance desirable. But this is getting pretty deep into the weeds.



Dec 19, 2025 at 11:45 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · Options to get more reach


jjcpa wrote:
I will get 1.4 III firstly and will try couple events.

If still short, my next choice will be 300mm IS and may try 7d II.

On my local facebook, $1500 for non IS and $2000 for IS. Both like new conditions. But still want to stay away from focus by wire. 3 reasons
1. No feeling for manual focus if needed
2. You have to turn on camera to use it
3. Easily broke (I heard)

Thank you all


1) You won't use manual focus for action. The focusing screen quality in later DSLRs is not as good as back in the pre-AF era, including the 1DXII. Back when one could swap the focusing screens of Canon's DSLRs, I put the Ec-S screens in my 1D cameras to have half a chance of more accurate manual focusing. The default screens did something with the way they transmitted the image to make anything faster than f/2.8 difficult to precisely manually focus.

2) You have to turn on the camera anyway to use it (the camera).

3) I had a few of these USM fly-by-wire lenses: 400/2.8 v1, v2, 600/4 non-IS, 85/1.2L v1. I owned the 85 the longest, between about 2004 until around 2022. I used it for A LOT of weddings and events and generally didn't pamper it. I even hung a hood on it from the filter threads because the stock clip-on hood was too easy to knock off, which put additional weight on the lens group that did the focusing, which in turn put additional strain on the USM motor. It didn't fail. Nor did my 400 & 600mm lenses. But yes, a 300/2.8 non-IS is at least ~26 years old now and if it's only $500 difference, get the IS version.

FWIW, I have had more USM failures of lenses that were of the direct manual focus design because something with the clutch mechanism would wear out over time. And a side effect was that the AF would no longer work properly when the lens was pointed at certain angles. I.e. shooting in vertical orientation pointed slightly up or down (I no longer remember the exact trigger for the problem). I had these issues with the EF 135/2 multiple times over the span of also ~2004-2022. I believe its USM was replaced three times.

If anything, I'd say that having a mechanical linkage between the focusing ring and focusing group was a point for potential failure. Whereas the fly by wire design has no direct mechanical link and therefore does not put any strain on the USM. But other things could fail, such as the brushes that tell the USM when the focusing ring is turning. I guess one niche appeal of the direct focus design could be that the lens could still be focused if the USM failed, but again, for sports, you're going to want to be using AF all the time anyway.



Dec 20, 2025 at 12:11 AM
bman212121
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · Options to get more reach


I always appreciate the bigger insights you provide. I wouldn't have guessed at the EVF blackout feeling different between ES and EFCS. The R5's default EVF experience is shockingly poor, and you have to turn off power saving for the EVF display to make it usable. Not sure if that was something you had already figured out when playing around with the cameras initially.

The frame rate limitations seems odd but definitely is something noteworthy, If my 5 seconds of searching suggests a non supported lens might only get 6 - 7fps in some cases, which would be similar to the 5D IV. (The 300 that's being referenced) So if the OP is okay with that number then it's not an issue, but if they wanted the same speed as their 1DX II they would require electronic shutter. The 70 - 200mm IS II sounds like it does not have that limitation and could get the full FPS on mirrorless cameras.



Dec 20, 2025 at 12:25 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.2 #4 · Options to get more reach


I don't think avoiding the focus by wire makes a lot of sense, in this case. You're not really going to use mf on highly capable bodies like 5D4 and 1DXII for these sports.

R5 reach no better than op has now. R7 makes sense because 200mm basically becomes 320mm

I'm very positive on 7D2, in general, not making much sense to me in this case though




Dec 20, 2025 at 01:33 AM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · Options to get more reach


rscheffler wrote:
In OP's first post, they stated that FF (5DIV and 1DXII) with 70-200 is too short for the access they have as a parent/spectator.

7DII AF is outclassed by mirrorless. R7 has certain drawbacks but it has much higher pixel density than 7DII and superior AF, which OP stated as a high priority. Is it as good as R5II, R1? No, but it should at least be as good as the 1DXII.

The original R5 is an interesting option. It's e-shutter scan speed is ~1/60, meaning it is a compromise for certain ball and stick types of sports, but for others,
...Show more


I agree that money buys something. And that r7 provides a lot of effective magnification - with 1.4x and 1.6x and much more ability to crop 1.25x equivalent - because of 32mpx vs 24mpx. R7 makes 70-200 into 150(1.6x1.4)-560mm f4 (1.6x1.4x.1.25 cropping) equivalent. Versus the 1d IV, which is equivalent to 130-360mm f4 because of less ability to crop. But maybe 360mm is enough (if not 7d2 equivalent of 156-448/f4 might be enough).

I think get the 1.4x. See whether it's enough for keepers at a little higher iso. Borrow a 7d2 or buy it and sell it. 7d2 above iso800 is pretty close to r7 or r5 in apsc mode, for image quality. Even with r5 because of 45mpx for iso performance above is800. And better than the r7 by $1000 if you can get by with less cropping.

Try the 1.4x on your 1d IV first. Then may try the 7dii if you can borrow one.

I think that zoom is more important than fstop. The 300/2.8 is big, heavy, and prime. If you buy it you have to juggle lens/bodies and you will miss shots. Would you rather miss the shot because they move in close or get 1 stop (eg 12,800 vs 6400 ISO) less image quality. I would rather have 70-200/2.8 with apsc 1.6x1.4x (150-450f4) than 300 prime (that can be 420mm with even more risk of not being able to zoom out at f4). I would rather have 2 x 70-200/2.8's - one on 5div and the other on 7dii/1.4x - lighter, cheaper, and smaller.

Re focus by wire. You would forget this issue in short order if you had r5 or r7. But being 1/2 in mirrorless and 1/2 in dslr, will make you juggle more. Adapters, different menus, more expensive lens. But you would really like the a/f, buffer, eye tracing, pre burst.... and not like the big $$$$, that you can avoid with skill.



Dec 20, 2025 at 09:22 AM
jjcpa
Online

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · Options to get more reach


Too much information for me already. Right now I will buy 1.4 for sure and only consider the following:
1. Get 7d II ($500 Canadian$)
6. Buy sigma 120-300 f2.8 ($1400 OS but not sports)
7. Buy canon 300mm IS I (> $2000)

I will try the sigma one locally on my 1Dx II. The seller had both and said
“The canon one is slightly sharper and slightly faster AF, while the Sigma have stronger stabilizer 4stop vs canon EF mark I 2 stop. For indoor sport zoom is much more flexible.
And the canon one still good with 2x extender but this one better stop down 1/3or 2/3stop when 2x attached“



Dec 20, 2025 at 03:12 PM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · Options to get more reach


jjcpa wrote:
Too much information for me already. Right now I will buy 1.4 for sure and only consider the following:
1. Get 7d II ($500 Canadian$)
6. Buy sigma 120-300 f2.8 ($1400 OS but not sports)
7. Buy canon 300mm IS I (> $2000)

I will try the sigma one locally on my 1Dx II. The seller had both and said
“The canon one is slightly sharper and slightly faster AF, while the Sigma have stronger stabilizer 4stop vs canon EF mark I 2 stop. For indoor sport zoom is much more flexible.
And the canon one still good with 2x extender but this one
...Show more

I would not expect that you will be happy with the 2x. The 1.4x on L lens is pretty good, but 2x vs 1.4x just magnifies noise.

I would try to find it here and compare. I suspect that the 70-200 with 1.4x is sharper, faster focus and better IS than the Sigma.
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1197&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=803&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0




Dec 20, 2025 at 03:49 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · Options to get more reach


jjcpa wrote:
Too much information for me already. Right now I will buy 1.4 for sure and only consider the following:
1. Get 7d II ($500 Canadian$)
6. Buy sigma 120-300 f2.8 ($1400 OS but not sports)
7. Buy canon 300mm IS I (> $2000)

I will try the sigma one locally on my 1Dx II. The seller had both and said
“The canon one is slightly sharper and slightly faster AF, while the Sigma have stronger stabilizer 4stop vs canon EF mark I 2 stop. For indoor sport zoom is much more flexible.
And the canon one still good with 2x extender but this one
...Show more

Like Scott mentioned, I'd generally avoid the 2x unless it's a top-end prime, or a really excellent zoom like the new RF 70-200/2.8 Z. 1.4x is a much better option resulting in less image quality compromise and only one stop light loss that will better suit indoor venues.

You should try the Sigma to see what you think. I've read it's a bit softer at 300 where you'll probably want to use it most, at least compared to the Canon 300 primes. The unknown will be how well it does AF. Sigma has a reputation of somewhat flaky AF in the DSLR era, which seems to have mostly gone away with their mirrorless lenses. I believe I've read a few comments that the 120-300 performs better on mirrorless, benefitting from the more consistent AF capabilities of those cameras. But that's also true for all EF lenses adapted to Canon R and something I noticed immediately after transitioning to mirrorless.

I'm curious what you use the Sony a9 for?



Dec 20, 2025 at 08:55 PM
jjcpa
Online

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · Options to get more reach


For A9, I carry it everywhere and everyday to shoot my sons. I attach a small Samyang 45mm. It helps me to catch every moments like a point and shoot. I also travel with it. Sometimes I attach sigma 105 f1.4 for portrait of my sons.


Dec 20, 2025 at 09:26 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · Options to get more reach


It's unfortunate most of the old Minolta/Sony A mount lenses are not as good for adapting to Sony mirrorless, with respect to AF performance (i.e. not screw-drive AF), as Canon's EF lenses to Canon's R system.

There was an A mount Minolta/Sony 300/2.8 SSM (USM focusing motor), but I'm guessing it's nowhere as available on the used market as the various EF versions. Also no idea how well it would adapt to the a9. But the a9 otherwise would be a great sports camera.




Dec 20, 2025 at 10:17 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.2 #11 · Options to get more reach




jjcpa wrote:
Too much information for me already. Right now I will buy 1.4 for sure and only consider the following:
1. Get 7d II ($500 Canadian$)
6. Buy sigma 120-300 f2.8 ($1400 OS but not sports)
7. Buy canon 300mm IS I (> $2000)

I will try the sigma one locally on my 1Dx II. The seller had both and said
“The canon one is slightly sharper and slightly faster AF, while the Sigma have stronger stabilizer 4stop vs canon EF mark I 2 stop. For indoor sport zoom is much more flexible.
And the canon one still good with 2x extender but this one
...Show more

I think the Sigma might be pretty good, actually. Years ago. pop photo compared 300/2.8 Sigma to 120-300, the prime was a bit sharper, but are you going to need top sharpness on people photography anyway.

Even if it misses some, you should be able to get plenty of photos of your sons. I'm not against R7 suggestion but 1DXII a fairly recent pro sports body imo, 5D4 too



Dec 21, 2025 at 12:06 PM
volyrat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · Options to get more reach


Lots of great information in here. But maybe a couple of questions:

- what are you going to do with the pictures?
- when shooting with your 70-200 2.8, what ISO / f/stop / shutter speed? My kids played sports in places that ranged from decently lit to dank dark dungeon.
- How proficient are you at post processing? Comfortable with noise reduction processes?

I think the answers to those questions might get you different or more refined suggestions.



Dec 22, 2025 at 03:42 PM
jjcpa
Online

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · Options to get more reach


I don’t print. Mostly I shared photos with other parents and added them to digital frame and created slides on TV.

The lastest shoot was school’s Christmas concert in gym. I used M 1/128, f2.8 or 4.0 and 1600 or 3200 on 1Dx II.

I tried 70-200mm on my A7R3 today at home. AF is OK on static objects. I will try it next time for school events. I can get more room to crop.

For post processing, I am very advanced using C1 mostly and sometimes Photoshop.

Thank you for asking.

volyrat wrote:
Lots of great information in here. But maybe a couple of questions:

- what are you going to do with the pictures?
- when shooting with your 70-200 2.8, what ISO / f/stop / shutter speed? My kids played sports in places that ranged from decently lit to dank dark dungeon.
- How proficient are you at post processing? Comfortable with noise reduction processes?

I think the answers to those questions might get you different or more refined suggestions.




Dec 22, 2025 at 04:31 PM
1              end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account