New camera or New lens….Help please!!??!!

[Johnplesh]

I have an 80D using 85mm f/1.8 for poorly lit middle school basketball. 
This current setup does great when at 1.8-2 and 1/1000 and I’m right in the corner taking shots. But anything else and I get poor quality. I’ve read to set at f/2.8 for this lens and keep at 1/800-1/1000 but put the ISO up to 3200 or slightly above. But the quality is still lousy. I’ve read the 80D doesn’t handle noise well. When I use Lightroom to decrease the noise I’m not thrilled with how soft the images look. I’m trying very hard to learn on my own and been experimenting for a year. I tried a f/2.8 70-200 iii canon on my 80D and honestly it didn’t blow me away. I think my camera is the limiting factor. If I’m replacing it I’ll have to buy used, did I say I had 3 kids, and I’m considering mirrorless for my needs. 

I need something that handles low light better than my 80D does, I’m happy to have either DSLR or mirrorless. My pictures will mostly be of dance and indoor sports. What would you suggest I start looking (and saving) for?

Also, is the 80D a camera that might sell easily and if so what price might I expect to sell it at including a 50mm 1.8 lens???

thanks in advance if you took the time to read this. 

[justadude]

Could you post a few sample images for us to see exactly what you are talking about?

The 80D is getting a little bit old, and technology has increased... but I used the 80D for a few years for sports photography with the same 70-200mm F/2.8L lens and had great luck.

[Johnplesh]

Here was a good example. Close up shot but blurry. 

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

If you have a EF 85 f1.8 and are shooting at f2.8, you are leaving 1.2 full stops of aperture on the table.  Granted this produces a very narrow DOF, but it would help you lower your ISO a bit.

Your camera may be operating at it limits for your shooting conditions, but try the above and see what happens.  Every bit can count when you are shooting indoors and in lower light. 

I have an EF 85 f1.8 (now retired).  Its a great budget friendly portrait lens.   

For used pricing ideas, visit KEH.

Once you have a budget, we can help with recommendations if you feel this is the right path.

[ebiggs1]

Any newer camera is probably going to be better at high ISO levels. New tech basically always moves toward better specs.

You could try a 90D but it may not be a huge difference but its likely to be some better. Plus the price could be right in your ballpark or court. You do know beside Lightroom there is specialized software that can deal with high ISO noise and even poor IQ. From what I have seen they seem to work very well.

If you have lightroom you should have the full Photoshop 2024. So, before you do anything ot buy anything I suggest you explore PS in correcting high ISO noise.

"I tried a f/2.8 70-200 iii canon on my 80D and honestly it didn’t blow me away."

This is troubling. If that lens doesn't do it for you there is no better lens on the market as it is the best there is. Bar none! Can you post some samples?

[rs-eos]

As others have mentioned, you could be at the limits of your current gear.  Definitely agree though to use f/1.8 when you can.  As Rick mentioned though, it could be challenging if your subjects would be very close due to the narrow depth of field.

Beyond that, unfortunately it will cost if wanting better performance.  Here would be the order of what I'd feel would be provide best bang for buck:

1. Newer full frame camera.   This will give you far greater ISO performance.  Images at ISO 3200 on such cameras are quite good quality.
2. A lens like the RF 135mm f/1.8L.  Note that your 85mm being used on your current crop-sensor camera has a field-of-view equivalent of 136mm on full frame.  So if moving to full frame and you'd want at least the same reach, you'd need a 135mm lens.
3. You could reconsider a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens though you'd have to balance the narrower aperture with raising ISO higher.   Everything is a trade-off.

[jrhoffman75]

Shoot in RAW if currently aren’t. The download the free trial of Topaz Photo AI and see if that helps your images. 

[Tronhard · Accepted solution]

Hi John and welcome to the forum:

First I agree with my colleagues that you may require an upgrade to get better performance at higher ISO, and I would recommend mirrorless as, having had the 80D and 90D, the 90D is no great improvement, in fact arguably the opposite as it crammed more pixels into the same space.

As Ricky and Ernie have both suggested, I would recommend one of the new R-series bodies, and definitely go full-frame, the sensor being bigger they should have better noise performance than a crop body.   The question as to what model is tied to your budget.

If you can afford it, I would suggest going for either the R6 or R6MkII, both are brilliant cameras, use the same battery as your 80D, have face and eye tracking that is superior to lower models and a better build.  They have In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) that helps to reduce camera shake in dim light and lower shutter speeds.   

You can use your current EF lenses with those bodies via the Canon EF-RF adapter, and so far I have never had an issue with them.  If you currently use EF-S lenses, although they will physically connect to a FF body, I would not recommend them as their narrower cone of projection onto the sensor will not cover a FF sensor and you will end up cropped by a factor of 2.56.   If you are going to sell your 80D, sell the lenses with it to help fund your purchase.

You can pick up a refurbished camera from Canon (like new, with limited warranty) as follows:
R6: https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/refurbished-eos-r6-body
R6MkII: https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/refurbished-eos-r6-mark-ii-body

If you can afford to invest in glass, then look at the range of RF glass they are brilliant optics.

[Johnplesh]

Thanks for the detailed response. I’m overwhelmed. The R6/R6ii maybe a bit much for me even used as my body budget used is closer to $1k. I have seen a few like new but used R7’s locally but I don’t know if they’ll be worth it in comparison to what I have. I do t want to spend that much to be underwhelmed. So if continuing to save for the R6 is worth it then maybe I should go that route?  The R7 seems to be really nice in low light at 32,000 ISO and shutter maxed out, but that was with stationary objects rather than athletes running. I wanted to see it in its most demanding setting and the R7 seemed to still be not that bad in sharpness 

[rs-eos]

What will be the destination of the images though? Very large prints? Social media? I'm wondering as to how much detail you'd actually be needing.