topic Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)? in EOS DSLR & Mirrorless Cameras

What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

knitgirl — Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:30:17 GMT

I need some help...

My beloved SL1 is, I think, starting to fail. (It gets twitchy about reading SD cards - as in, it won't turn on sometimes with a memory card in, regardless of size or brand card - and sometimes I have to turn it on and off a few times for it to agree to try autofocusing, regardless of the lens on it.) Given the sheer number of photos I've taken with it (I'm pretty sure I've rolled over 9,999 five or six times now), plus the entry-level price point, I'm guessing repair isn't going to be worthwhile.

I primarily shoot photos of my own family and of product shots for my small sewing business, but seasonally I also shoot field band photos of my daughter's band - at night, on a high school football field. Tricky lighting. The only lenses I have and use are prime lenses - a 24mm EF-S f/2.8, a 40mm EF f/2.8, and an 85mm EF f/1.8. (Though there might be an ancient kit lens from my very first rebel kicking around my basement somewhere...)

My favorite feature of the SL1 is it's size, but it definitely lacks the ability to push the ISO for those low light photos. I personally find anything past ISO1600 to be too noisy. I do shoot RAW, and am comfortable editing in both Lightroom and Photoshop, I just prefer to start with a cleaner image than higher ISOs give me on this camera. I suspect a higher end sensor would improve that, though I have no place local to go try out cameras to prove that theory.

My question is, should I upgrade to a better crop-sensor body, or a full-frame body? I have basically no budget, but I need a camera that works consistently so I'll find a way - I'm just definitely not on the "money is no object" end of the spectrum! I am willing to buy used/refurbished. The 6D looks like it might meet my needs, but I am open to suggestions.

And then as a follow-up, if I go full frame, what can I do for longer-reach field band photos, as my 85mm will no longer work for that? (It isn't really long enough anyway even on a crop sensor, but it is fast enough!) I'm a prime girl all the way, but I have considered a zoom for this but the fast ones are *so* expensive. Would a full-frame body and an f/4 70-200 zoom lens be a reasonable combo, or am I going to need a faster zoom even with the full-frame?

Thanks so much for any advice!

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

ebiggs1 — Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:15:26 GMT

If you love your SL1 you know there is a Canon EOS Rebel SL2 DSLR Camera. Everything has been upgraded in it over yours.

As for a lens upgrade I think you would really like and benefit from the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. It is a constant, fast aperture zoom that covers most of the best range for a SL2.

"My question is, should I upgrade to a better crop-sensor body, or a full-frame body?" First don't get sucked into the hype over FF. If your current SL1 is doing what you want the newer SL2 will do it better. There are reasons to go FF but you may not, doesn't sound like it form what you have said, have one of them. On the other hand there isn't any reason why you shouldn't. Big help ain't I ?

Full frame is going to be bigger, heavier and moe expensive. Keep that in mind.

As far as shooting the band photos, something I do all the time, no biggie. Use what you have and if it isn't the best choice, make it so in post editing. How about using a 120mm lens for a pano? Not the best choice? Right.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

MikeSowsun — Thu, 29 Mar 2018 21:18:08 GMT

I would also recommend the SL2.

Your SL1 has a Digic 5 processor. The SL2 has a Digic 7 processor which will improve your high ISO photos.

But for really clean high ISO nothing beats Full Frame. In addition to the cost of the 6D you would need to buy at least one new EF lens.

Your EF 40 STM could replace your EF-S 24 STM and your 85 1.8 USM could replace your EF 40 STM, so you really just need something like the EF 135 f/2 to give you the same field of view as your 85 did.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

knitgirl — Fri, 30 Mar 2018 21:47:14 GMT

So...I agree that an SL2 would be an improvement over my SL1 (especially if it works consistently.)

But these are the sort of band photos I'm trying to take. The parents *really* like individual performer action shots, and that is something I'm struggling to get with the equipment I currently own. These were all shot in RAW, ISO1600, f/4.0, 1/160s. These particular ones are barely cropped because I was able to be on the sidelines instead of in the stands. Cropping further just makes them noisy. I feel like they could be better with a better sensor, but maybe it doesn't have to be in a full frame body?

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

knitgirl — Fri, 30 Mar 2018 21:56:42 GMT

Yeah, I know if I change to a full frame I'm losing the 24mm lens. 🙂 Actually, I would *love* to switch to using my 85mm for portraits, but with my current crop sensor I'd have to be in another room of my tiny house to make that work.

Would I be better off with the 135mm prime, or - given the photos I posted above (I was surprised to see I had taken those at f/4.0) and what I'm trying to accomplish - would the 70-200mm f/4 L USM be a reasonable option? Refurbished, they're both similarly priced and both weigh similarly a lot...

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

Waddizzle — Fri, 30 Mar 2018 22:33:33 GMT

You will not lose your 24mm for as long as you have your SL-1. If you’r shooting a night a lot, then a full frame 6D just might be the ticket for you. I recommend it.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

ebiggs1 — Thu, 02 Aug 2018 13:36:07 GMT

"Would I be better off with the 135mm prime, or - given the photos I posted above (I was surprised to see I had taken those at f/4.0) and what I'm trying to accomplish - would the 70-200mm f/4 L USM be a reasonable option? Refurbished, they're both similarly priced and both weigh similarly a lot..."

IMHO, as always. I have been shooting high schools, GEHS in particular for over 30 years. I can tell you how I do it. I shoot all school activities not just the band. But mostly the band for sure. Again, IMHO, the gear you have is not upo to the task. If you really want to do this I would invest in a FF and the 6D Mk II is the least expensive way to go. Once again, IMHO, the lenses you have are not helping.

My gear through out the years has always included a 1 series. Not exclusively but usually. As you may know not all 1 series are FF. Most are croppers so FF in itself is not a cure all. I currently still use a 1D Mk IV and it is not a FF camera. My lenses of choice are the ef 24-70mm f2.8L II and the ef 70-200mm f2.8L II. Secondary lenses I carry are the ef 16-35mm f2.8L II and Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX OS HSM.

"...would the 70-200mm f/4 L USM be a reasonable option?" Again, IMHO, no this is not a good choice.

How about in the rain? Yup, they don't stop FB and neither does our band.

The most inportant factor here doing this is three things. Location, location and location. You indicated you had free range of the sidelines. Great, but you also need to become up close and personal with Photoshop. Good gear, good location and PS, how can you fail?

Ditch the primes and get, "My lenses of choice are the ef 24-70mm f2.8L II and the ef 70-200mm f2.8L II." Even if you have to buy used these are the way to go. The primes' day is done!

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

coachboz68 — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 15:23:45 GMT

<<Would a full-frame body and an f/4 70-200 zoom lens be a reasonable combo, or am I going to need a faster zoom even with the full-frame?>>

I cannot give you sufficient answers to your specific questions, but maybe some of my experiences may be useful in some way...

I have a FF and do shoot a lot of high-school sports (football and soccer), including night time. I typically capture the game action itself, which requires a min of 1/1000(ish) shutter speeds. Occassionally, if I slow down the shutter for the non-action shots, I find that I can use f/4 on my 70-200 (it's a 2.8, but sometimes I want more DOF for group shots), but that's with a really slow shutter speed (i.e. ranges way less than 1/640, which is what yours were).

So I think you are going to be pushing it for action shots on a nightime high-school field if you want to totally stop the motion. If youre OK with the faster moving flags having some blur, you might be OK with f/4. But as you say, some of those fields are rough when it comes to lighting, and from my experience, you're pushing the envelope if you also want lower ISOs to eliminate noise.

Only last bit I can pass along is that I find most parents love the shots and care absolutely nothing about mild noise in the picture (the way I do), given they are shots that they cannot get with their smartphones. I find that just applying some noise reduction in lightroom is fine.

I wish you could rent a lens for one of the events before sinking in the cash, but you say there are none around you. 😞 Are there mail order rentals?

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

athman8 — Sat, 22 Sep 2018 12:44:19 GMT

I dont think I want to switch to mirrorless but could be convinced Would need to understand if how I can use my current lenses Ive invested in a few good ones that i love [links removed per forum guidelines]

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

ebiggs1 — Tue, 03 Apr 2018 06:54:10 GMT

"I dont think I want to switch to mirrorless..."

Keep that thought. You don't want mirrorless of all the choices out there it is the worse.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

imtomalex — Thu, 02 Aug 2018 06:42:44 GMT

Canon 6D - not only is it a beautiful full-frame sensor, but you could (probably) use your existing Canon lenses and other accessories. Thanks & Regards, Live NetTV

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

ebiggs1 — Thu, 02 Aug 2018 13:38:17 GMT

"...you could (probably) use your existing Canon lenses..."

You can't use ef-s lenses on a 6D or 6D Mk II. She can use her ef 85mil.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

sienna2506 — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 13:28:55 GMT

The SL2 has a Digic 7 processor which will improve your high ISO photos.

But for really clean high ISO nothing beats Full Frame. In addition to the cost of the 6D you would need to buy at least one new EF lens. [link removed per forum guidelines]

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

shadowsports — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 16:50:42 GMT

Was a pricepoint ever established?

Everytime I suggest something here, the person posting often says, "thats out of my budget". The last time was a $298 refurb body directly from Canon.

So, now that we know what kind of pictures the OP is looking to take and how they want to use their camera, can we establish a pricepoint, so we aren't suggesting things that are below or above what the user wants to spend? I played with a SL2 last week that was installed in a photobooth at one of my clients. Nice little body, super compact too. There is value in both platforms.. APS-C and FF and like Ernie mentioned previously, if APS-C is meeting your needs, stick with it.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

ebiggs1 — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 14:54:44 GMT

"... for really clean high ISO nothing beats Full Frame."

You can't say this as a blanket statement. You have to specify exactly which models you are comparing. Would you take a 1D and its FF sensor for high ISO or a 7D and its crop sensor ? I know that's extreme but it makes the point.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

jamesthomas11 — Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:29:26 GMT

@athman8 wrote:
I dont think I want to switch to mirrorless but could be convinced Would need to understand if how I can use my current lenses Ive invested in a few good ones that i love redbox showbox apk morpheus

Hi, athman8

I'm totally agreed with you.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

Tronhard — Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:14:04 GMT

I tend to agree with Rick (Shadowsports) on this one... we have no idea of the OP's budget and that is a critical piece of information.

That said, from what I have viewed in this thread a Canon SL2 (offering considerable performance upgrades over the SL1), combined with a 70-200 F4 lens would give a much better reach for the images of individuals on the field. The other lenses would work as they do with the SL1. Based on the images the OP has posted those seem to be working out well for her.

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

lixasosame — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:26:37 GMT

9down vote

You should only upgrade when you need to. Chances are good you won't wait that long or be that sensible. 😉

So, basically, to me, it comes down to a few "tipping points" as to when "upgrading" (more realistically you may be sidegrading [e.g., crop to full frame], or expanding [e.g., adding mirrorless to a dSLR rather than replacing it]) has been worth it for me. You will find these reasons not unlike those that decide when it's time to purchase a car. In order of most-sensible to least they are:

When your current camera dies and you have nothing to shoot with.
[Personal "worth it" metric--your eventual value may vary] When the sum of the new camera body's tier and generation counts above/after my old one is at least 3, and my old body is getting near that 100k click mark.
When your frustration level with your current gear makes letting go of money you've set aside more than worth it--and you've done enough research to know how the new gear eliminates (or reduces) the frustration. [May involve discovering previously-unknown/unresearched tradeoffs after purchase that may equalize frustration more than envisioned].
When you can find a rockin' deal (usually used or refurb)
Just because you **bleep** well want it that bad.
here

However. Keep in mind that nearly ANY other piece of gear you can purchase will hold value longer and better than a camera body. Lenses, flashes, and support gear can be used across multiple cameras. They tend not be replaced every 1-3 years, and they also tend to hold value better on the used market. Camera bodies depreciate even while they're still new.

And, in addition, experience and training often count for more when it comes to image quality than any piece of gear. If the goal is to get better photographs, then your money may actually be better spent on airline tickets, or a seminar, or books and training videos than on any camera body.

Thanks

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

wq9nsc — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 12:36:00 GMT

There is a big spread between what is the overall best equipment for acquiring these types of images and what is the best equipment to meet this individual's particular needs. Full frame sensors of the same generation/technology and with roughly equal pixel counts will have a noise advantage over a crop sensor given their relative pixel size and light gathering capability but a current generation good crop size sensor will easily outperform an earlier full frame in the noise department. I use primarily full frame now but I still have and use my old 1D Mark 2 with its 1.3X sensor and I loved that sensor size for outdoor sports but it doesn't provide the high ISO performance I need for night or indoor games.

I do some band and cheerleader shots but primarily soccer and football players where the shutter speed has to remain very high for the fast action. For what I primarily shoot, at night F2.8 is the "slowest" lens I can reasonably use because in addition to the shutter speed/ISO trade-off I also need the fastest/best AF performance which also comes from using a fast lens. For shooting the band the requirements are a little less demanding given the somewhat reduced action speed and a 70-200 F4 would do although I would still go for the better F2.8 version if the budget permits and this lens will serve you well into the future. For my usage I would take a used older non IS F2.8 over a new F4 with IS but that is because of my primary focus upon action sports. The 70-200 F2.8 is a very good and very versatile lens and tomorrow night I will be using a 300 F2.8 on the 1DX 2 with the 70-200 F2.8 on the 1DX which is a pretty good Friday night football combo. For indoor soccer I am going to experiment with trying the excellent and relatively inexpensive 135 F2 on the second body to see how that works compared to the more versatile zoom. For what you are shooting, a good current crop sensor body will work fine BUT keep in mind shooting requirements in the future so that whatever you buy now will also suffice for anything you will be doing in the next few years. In my overall budget if I was dropping back a level on something I would drop back on the body before dropping to a less desirable lens.

You want to be as close as possible to what you are shooting in order to take advantage of as much available light as possible and given the often poor and varied field lighting of most public school facilities you need to plan your shots in advance to get the student shots you want when they are in an optimal location. With the band you can find out the program in advance and be prepared for what they are going to do at each point during the on field part of their performance. You might even attend a practice session (if permitted) so that you can make notes of shots you want to get during the actual show and to figure out your desired placement. If you want really good photos of the band on the field, at the very least get as far forward in the stands as you can while still maintaining a clear view but if where you are shooting is like most public schools there is a track surrounding the field and you can probably get access to it. Talk to the school AD or other admin about sharing photos with the band director, yearbook staff, etc. well before the event and this should help you to gain field access. At the high school level this is usually a pretty simple process especially if done in advance and this "diplomatic immunity" will usually work when visiting other fields once you know the band director. When playing at other schools I will go in with the coaching staff, AD, or trainer in order to ensure field access; the exception was when we played at a university facility and then I just went through the typical media access process. If the images you take are of benefit to the school then the relevant administrators will be your ally in helping you to acquire better images AND they will be familiar with the school policies on image usage so that you don't inadvertently provide images to the wrong people. I wouldn't send a group of images directly to a booster club or other "unofficial" school affiliate without a full understanding of the school policies. Don't do anything that will damage your field access opportunities.

Make sure that you stay aware of your surroundings and stay in the clear. At many high school fields timing is pretty tight for halftime and you don't want to be between the football players and the field entrance when they get ready to go back on near the end of halftime. One of the funnier scenes I have witnessed in high school football was a rather out of shape photo guy struggling to run at the head of the players entering the field; he wasn't trying to get photos of them but had been shooting the band and didn't realize he was in their way. It looked like a bad U.S version of the running of the bulls.

Some of the players got a laugh out of my fast footwork at the last football game I shot because an opposing player was determined to make the catch even though he was about 10 yards out of bounds and I did a very fast reverse to clear the area. I was invited to attend the next team practice in order to demonstrate my fast reverse. This is a reminder that YOU are also being viewed while doing photography so don't trip over the players bench or accidentally tackle an official while capturing images causing embarrassment to YOUR student. At that game my daughter and several of her fellow soccer players motioned me over to the stands to exchange high fives in recognition of my not getting tackled; I have coached most of them over the years and my daughter has a great sense of humor 🙂

Most importantly, resolve to get the most out of whatever equipment you are using so that the gear can fully deliver all that it can provide. Technology is a tool that is too often used as a crutch; whatever new gear you buy will provide better results compared to your SL1 but make sure that you also take the time to upgrade your technique as necessary and newer gear will open up new possibilities so prepare to do some new and different things with it rather than just focusing upon areas where it has improved over your current body and lens.

Rodger

Re: What camera body should I upgrade to (from SL1)?

smithdevon384 — Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:42:47 GMT

@sienna2506 wrote:
The SL2 has a Digic 7 processor which will improve your high ISO photos.

But for really clean high ISO nothing beats Full Frame. In addition to the cost of the 6D you would need to buy at least one new EF lens.

Thank you for the suggestion. 🙂