Should I upgrade by rebel T7 or upgrade my lenses?

[Lkcphotos31]

I currently have a rebel T7 it works pretty well for what I have used it for so far I do a lot of motion and sports photography. The auto focus isn't great and it struggles in low light, theres alot of noise present not sure if its the camera or maybe I just can't figure out how to fix it. I have the 18-55mm 3.5 kit lens and a 75-300 f/4. So i'm wondering if I should upgrade my camera body first or put some money into buying a ef 70-200 f/2.8 lens. Please help!

[Tintype_18 · Accepted solution]

I just posted on the Camera section.

[deebatman316]

Is the lens making noise or is the picture noisy. Low light is a weakness of a DSLR camera. This is where mirrorless shines so does for moving subjects. 

[Lkcphotos31]

The picture has noise in it. 

[deebatman316]

Do you have a budget for a new camera. I would suggest moving to mirrorless now. What are your specific needs and uses.

[Lkcphotos31]

I'd say my budget is around 1000 for a body. Probably a refurbished model of some sort because its cheaper. I mostly shoot sports so I would like to have a body with fast accurate AF also good in low light conditions for night time games. I'm also interested in videography not as much as photography but if theres a model you think does both well I could look into it. 

[Tintype_18 · Accepted solution]

I just posted on the Camera section.

[zakslm · Accepted solution]

I have a T7 as well and really like the camera for what I use it for.  At the risk of sounding flippant I would answer your question "yes and yes".  

In my opinion, the limitations of the T7 for sports and motion are 3fps in continuous shooting and as you mentioned, focus performance and noise (ISO 12800 in H.  CF2, ISO expansion enabled allows you select ISO H which is 12800, but with more noise than ISO 6400.  Also, a faster lens will increase autofocus performance and probably improve your shots overall.  

Not knowing your budget, I'll share what I think would be a modest upgrade, but increase performance in the areas you mentioned.  The Rebel 8Ti would more than double your frame rate to 7fps and has 45 point All Cross-type AF with Face Detection, ISO up to 25,600 and a faster DIGIC 8 Image Processor.  

With regard to the lenses, I would suggest that with longer lenses, you consider lenses with IS (Image Stabilization) although you can save quite a bit by buying the non-IS versions of similar lenses.   

I don't do much action shooting, but I've had very nice results with the Ef-S 55-250 f4-5.6 IS II and I think it performs better than the 75-300 family of lenses.  I bought the first iteration of that lens a long time ago for an EOS film camera I was using at the time and sold it after a short time to upgrade to a 100-300 USM zoom that worked better for me. 

Although I've not used one, a 70-200 IS f2.8L is highly regarded and highly desired.  There is a 70-200 f/4.0L that is less expensive and probably a very good lens but a stop slower and lacking IS.  

Depending upon you budget and your future plans, I think you have a large number of options including upgrading in the Rebel family or to something like a 90D, going to a full frame DSLR body or moving on to a mirrorless body.  

With regard to cost mitigation, I would suggest looking at refurbished options from Canon USA, B&H and Amazon Renewed and used options from KEH and B&H.  There are other used options, but I've only mentioned those sellers that I've used with satsifactory results and would recommend.    

Good luck!

[Lkcphotos31]

Thank you so much for that very detailed answer!

[wq9nsc]

For low light sports, both the lens and body upgrade would be beneficial and I would go lens first.  If you are in a location where the 70-200 f2.8 has enough reach, go for it first.  I use three camera bodies for football (1DX III) and the 70-200 f2.8 is on one and it is the one that gets the most use, the other two have a 400 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8.

But a body upgrade would be in order also as soon as you can swing it to a better sensor.  With the rush to mirrorless, there should be some good deals on excellent used DSLR models.  Good high ISO performance is critical for a lot of lower level sports venues even with a fast lens and lighting will vary across the area.  The three attached photos were shot Friday night and parts of the field pushed the ISO to 25,600, 32,000, and 40,000 respectively even though I was using f2.8 glass wide open.  Fast shutter speeds plus dark equals high ISO...

The images could be cleaned up further running them through some of the third party AI software but these were the result using Canon's DPP.

I tried a R3 for both football and soccer and hated it, there is still a lag and to me that is unacceptable when timing is critical.  Mirrorless are cheaper to manufacture and better for combined still/video cameras biased towards video so that is where the industry is going but a quality DSLR is an excellent sports shooter.  If I were doing primarily studio work, I would be fine with mirrorless but the offerings don't match 1 series performance yet for sports.

Rodger

ISO 25,600ISO 32,000ISO 40,000