Hello sports photographers here
I currently want to move to next cameras and have question.
I have R3 and want to ask if it works well with older EF 24-70 mark II
(i want to skip buying current RF 24-70 as it extends when zooming, unlike the newer nikon 24-70, so will wait till there will be newer model)
Also, in case you shot both Z8 and R5 II extensively, what's your opinion on autofocus performance.
I have R3 and older D5, so thinking to upgrade either to Z8 with grip, or maybe add another R3 or the newer R5II.
P.S. I read someone saying AF of R3 is better than of R5 II, but it's hard for me to believe that.
So i'm torn between the three. One thing i did read also that buffer on Z8 clears faster.
Thanks
I have not shot with Canon, but I shoot a LOT with a Z8 and Z9 (effectively the same camera, especially with the latest firmware update). The autofocus is pretty good. I did have to manually adjust AF on one lens with my Z8 before a firmware update, but things are usually tack sharp and follow pretty well.
As for burst clearing, I got bored one day and tested it on the Z8. I set the exposure limit to infinite, had the format on RAW already, and just held the shutter down. It never quit. I think I took over 200 pictures before I was convinced I didn't need to worry about buffering. Now, mind you, I run Delkin Black 512 GB cards, and they are FAST while also great at heat management. Expensive cards, but dang are they worth it.
EDIT to mention that that was on Continuous High, so 20fps.
Hi
Your observation about the buffer is interesting. I did see Matt Granger video on youtube, he got around 50 shots and the camera just had to wait ~5 seconds only after that he could continue shooting. I did see him showing that Z9 continued for much longer and cleared buffer very fast, and did let the camera to continue to shoot but not with Z8 that was "blocked" for some seconds.
Good to know it's much faster than that and that it's good for tracking.
Did you happen to compare your Z8/Z9 to Canons i mentioned?
You may want to reach out to FM member "arbitrage." Geoff is a birder and has used Canons, Nikons & Sonys. He currently shoots with a Sony A1-II. He has a pretty objective take on each system.
Wing.
The EF 24-70 f2.8 II lens is a workhorse for me in several sports. As is the case with many canon ef lenses, it works as well or better adapted to mirrorless than on DSLRs. Given the relatively small size of the lens (compared to 70-200 and up) the non-internal zoom doesn't bother me. My threshold for that seems to be 70-200 and I never bought the original RF 70-200 for that reason (waited for the internal zoom Z version). I never hesitate to use the EF 24-70 on R5 II, R3, or R1 for basketball and when I need wider shots for other sports.
One big advantage of the RF 24-70 f2.8 is image stabilization.
Allthink wrote:
Thanks Bruce
I see you are Canon shooter. Then, what you would recommend, additional R3, or R5 II or R1?
Maxim
R1 is obviously best, assuming no relevance of cost. In my hands the R5 II AF is just slightly off the capability of R1, mostly on initial acquisition. But I use R3 a lot, instead of R5 II for the smaller file sizes and because it is a really good sports camera. These three cameras are such a big advance in AF over prior Canon bodies that it seems silly to split hairs. There are some quirks of the R52 (e.g., battery life and hangs during precapture) that make it frustrating at times - but is my primary wildlife camera.
Thanks Bruce. In your experience, does R1 has less "blackout" than R3. When i shoot with R3, i see for split of second black viewfinder between the frames, it's little annoying, as you want to continue track the subject without that. I did try all relevant setting in menu for faster display but it feels not fast.
BTW, how you would rate the AF of R1, is it noticeably faster than R3 ?(more accurate, faster acquisition, etc)
I'm not really bothered by that brief blackout thing on R3 - I hardly notice it. I never really thought to look for it on R1, so maybe it is below my threshold for detection.
R1 is definitely a step up in initial acquisition - I'm amazed at when I'm slow getting the camera raised from a low position and then pointed at a player (with a focus button press) how the R1 seems to have focus locked before I can even really see the composition in the viewfinder. In the nature photography circles that I travel in, there are some people who have used both and claim the R1 is better than the Sony A1 II. As far as tracking goes, it certainly locks on better than R3. But in my hands, tracking accuracy is mostly related to how well I understand how to set the tracking up and I don't yet consider my expertise high in that regard yet. I have used the specialized modes for volleyball, soccer and basketball with some success but the algorithms do seem to get confused once in a while.
Precapture on R1 and R52 are very helpful - think set pieces in soccer.
Bruce
