I want to ask this question again and for the last time so i can have my decision very soon this year if possible or soon enough.
I am a Canon shooter for sports, but i stopped long time ago and my last camera was a DSLR, now if i want to resume photography with sports i am planning to get mirrorless cameras[brand new] that can serve me for about several years, my 1DX i bought it in 2012 i believe so i spent over a decade holding it but i stopped as i said, i don't keep changing or upgrading that much really, so whatever current latest model i can buy nowadays i will hold into it for almost half decade or a decade if possible, so here is my question:
Which two Canon mirrorless cameras do you recommend for sports that are not R1 or R3 please [due to price]
My only lenses i am using now mainly in sports are: EF 300mm 2.8 IS mk1, 70-200mm 2.8 IS mk2, 85mm 1.8, 135mm f2, i had before 24-70 2.8 mk1 but it is gone in Canon repairing service shop that is closed and out of business, i will get a replacement lens for 24-70
schlotz wrote:
Staying with Canon will require an adapter for those lenses. Body wise: probably the R6-II is your best choice.
Yeah agree and the canon adapter is pretty flawless with those older lenses. I think the R6 Mark iii has improved autofocus but will cost you more. Are you sure a used R3 can’t fit into your budget? 😀
R6 M2 has some crazy deals at the moment. Its basically a scale down R3. R6 M3 will get a MP bump but for sports, it does not matter much. You have the glass covered and it will work flawlessly with your mirrorless bodies. Good luck
carl_g wrote:
Yeah agree and the canon adapter is pretty flawless with those older lenses. I think the R6 Mark iii has improved autofocus but will cost you more. Are you sure a used R3 can’t fit into your budget? 😀
I try very very hard to always stay with a brand new item, and if it is my first Canon Mirrorless and after these long time stopping i don't see the point i buy a used, so those who gave up R3 what did they get then?
Actually R6 Mark III and R5 Mark II are the top choices in my list and mind, and talking about that R3 if buying used because of its brand price in fact i managed to find Nikon Z9 for the same price of R3 brand new or very close, between the two i will choose Z9 instantly, even if it is not the top best in sports at least it is amazing brilliant for birding and wildlife which is another thing i want to do next to sports, but sports is top priority for me, and the used R3 can be maybe almost close to R6 Mark III new or even R5 Mark 1, the only thing i hate about R3 is its mp, i discussed with someone very very long talk and he told me it is very wrong to consider mp as a factor, i used 1DX and i crop so much, and even its crop it outperforms the native uncropped frame from 1D3 i have or even 1D2n in the past before i sell it, newer cameras all having more mp than 1DX anyway, so i was thinking going higher mp just in case i crop a lot even if he said that is wrong idea, even R1 has 24mp, silly at that cost, even Nikon old camera Z7 versions has more mp.
schlotz wrote:
He's in the UAE Carl. Used might not be an option.
True, and i can't trust people here to have clean good condition used cameras, although i can order online overseas, but it will be bad idea if for any reason there is something wrong about it then a headache of whatever for return or refund, you know what i mean.
cs3is wrote:
R6 M2 has some crazy deals at the moment. Its basically a scale down R3. R6 M3 will get a MP bump but for sports, it does not matter much. You have the glass covered and it will work flawlessly with your mirrorless bodies. Good luck
Actually, even when i use EF 300mm in sports mainly football, i always crop with my 1DX, and although i still have good acceptable results i still want more mp, in fact i liked the cropped image from 1DX with 300mm more than non cropped images from 1D MarkIII with 300mm, i was hoping to get R7 because it has 33mp and a crop factor, but people didn't recommend it for low light and AF speed and such, so i ignored it, wish Canon make a Mark II for R7 keeping crop factor and maybe increase a bit that mp but having a better AF focus, that will be my choice no doubt.
I want R6 M3 for that MP bump exactly, and so R5 M2 is even better in this case, but somewhere people talked about low light of R5 M2 isn't on par and prefer the one from R6, that is also another point to think about it, but after all if i stop at every pros and cons of each camera then i will never get anything, i have to weigh which is more important for me personally more than for others.
Tareq wrote:
Actually, even when i use EF 300mm in sports mainly football, i always crop with my 1DX, and although i still have good acceptable results i still want more mp, in fact i liked the cropped image from 1DX with 300mm more than non cropped images from 1D MarkIII with 300mm, i was hoping to get R7 because it has 33mp and a crop factor, but people didn't recommend it for low light and AF speed and such, so i ignored it, wish Canon make a Mark II for R7 keeping crop factor and maybe increase a bit that mp but having a better AF focus, that will be my choice no doubt.
I want R6 M3 for that MP bump exactly, and so R5 M2 is even better in this case, but somewhere people talked about low light of R5 M2 isn't on par and prefer the one from R6, that is also another point to think about it, but after all if i stop at every pros and cons of each camera then i will never get anything, i have to weigh which is more important for me personally more than for others....Show more →
300mm will fall short for football on FF. If you are cropping a lot then I guess you need to invest in the glass more than the body. R6 M3 will be a sweet spot for high ISO shooting and good amount of Pixels. I have both and for wildlife and aviation, I always go to R7 with 1.4x on it.
cs3is wrote:
300mm will fall short for football on FF. If you are cropping a lot then I guess you need to invest in the glass more than the body. R6 M3 will be a sweet spot for high ISO shooting and good amount of Pixels. I have both and for wildlife and aviation, I always go to R7 with 1.4x on it.
Getting a long prime glass is WAY out of my reach, and i won't dream about it or even wish, i used my 300mm for years and have enough great shots with it already, i know a lens such as 400mm can do better in football or 500/600mm for birding, but that is my limit, so i decided i just upgrade the body and not the glass, and if i will shoot wildlife or even bird if they remain still and use a manual focus then i can do that with my telescope.
