Canon Lens Upgrade?

[Prodriver]

Hi,

My 16 year old son is going to start circuit racing in the Max5 Mx5 championship and I have a little left in the budget (around £300 -£350) after selling a few body parts on eBay to upgrade my gear to take a few shots of his career. Currently have a 7D with 17-85 and 70-200 f4 L and was wondering if there is any worthwhile upgrades, so needed your opinions.

I have looked at selling the 70-200 in favour of a 100-400L or 70-300L and have also considered a 1.4x converter for use with the 70-200. Have also looked at just a 70-200 2.8/70-200 IS as a straight replacement (doubt the budget would stretch to the 2.8 IS though?)

As you can see, too much choice.

So, if there's anyone out there that could offer an opinion/share their experiences of these lenses I'd appreciate it. As I say budget is tight because 'there is no such thing as cheap motorsport!'

Thanks,
Nige

 

[troutfisher]

Personally I would not buy anything yet,see what you need at the various circuits.
A few years ago I used to shoot hill climbs at my local circuit and simply by asking was able to obtain a press pass which enabled me to get a bit closer than everyone else to the action.
I used a 7D a 24/105 and a 70/200 F4 with a 1.4 TC, the 70/200 was subsequently changed for a 100-400 for other reasons.
I a lot of cases I could get quite close to the action and the 24/105 was all that was needed.
I think you may well find that what you have at the moment would be more than adequate, incidentally one day I was standing next to a 'Pro Tog', he got paid for his pix and he was using a 300 f2.8 on a 1D.

 

[Prodriver]

Personally I would not buy anything yet,see what you need at the various circuits.
A few years ago I used to shoot hill climbs at my local circuit and simply by asking was able to obtain a press pass which enabled me to get a bit closer than everyone else to the action.
I used a 7D a 24/105 and a 70/200 F4 with a 1.4 TC, the 70/200 was subsequently changed for a 100-400 for other reasons.
I a lot of cases I could get quite close to the action and the 24/105 was all that was needed.
I think you may well find that what you have at the moment would be more than adequate, incidentally one day I was standing next to a 'Pro Tog', he got paid for his pix and he was using a 300 f2.8 on a 1D.

Thanks Chris. Good shout on the 'press pass' - I'll try that one, especially as the guy we race with owns the race series.......

I've taken a few with the current set-up but, as always, could do with a being a bit closer.

You said you used a 1.4TC, did you see a difference in image quality, how does the AF react with it, how much does it slow the lens down?

NIge

 

[troutfisher]

Thanks Chris. Good shout on the 'press pass' - I'll try that one, especially as the guy we race with owns the race series.......

I've taken a few with the current set-up but, as always, could do with a being a bit closer.

You said you used a 1.4TC, did you see a difference in image quality, how does the AF react with it, how much does it slow the lens down?

NIge

Using a 1.4 with the 70/200 made very little difference to either IQ or AF speed with the proviso the light was OK.
I did have at one time the 300f4 L IS ( I had GAS at the time) and that was stella both with and without the 1.4 TC

 

[Grumps1974]

I use the 70-200 with the 1.4. IMHO there is very little loss of IQ with this combination. OK if you are a pixel peeper you MAY notice some minor impact bug for us ordinary mortals the combo works really well.

You will lose one stop so the f4 lens becomes f5.6. You would need to check if you can autofocus at this aperture on your body. In my experience with my 5 D mk3 AF is not adversely affected.

 

[JohnStewart]

From memory the max5 series takes place on race circuits like Brands Hatch and Silverstone, so you won't be able to get trackside without having PLI in place and probably a letter from an editor saying they are going to publish your work. Some series/teams have their own photographers and it might be possible to get access via this route but you will still need PLI in place. Hillclimbs and sprints are generally more relaxed in this area through they are getting stricter these days.

Even with trackside access, you will find your way quite a bit from the action at some of the circuits and I would recommend looking for a good Mk 1 100-400 which is a very versatile range, or the 300f4 prime which are both a bit outside your price range unless you sell your 70-200.

One thing to consider is that you'll likely be with your son in the paddock/pits until just before he heads out on track which gives you very limited time to reach anywhere other than the first corner or two during the race, as it can take 15-20 minutes to reach some parts of the longer circuits. It might be easier to take loads of photos in the paddock and pit lane areas that no-one else will be taking, and buy one or two from a pro photographer at each round as a lasting memory. That way you can enjoy the racing more instead of worrying about getting a perfect shot, especially if you have to shoot through a fence. It also means you won't miss any podium presentations which typically take place within minutes of the end of each race.

 

[Prodriver]

I use the 70-200 with the 1.4. IMHO there is very little loss of IQ with this combination. OK if you are a pixel peeper you MAY notice some minor impact bug for us ordinary mortals the combo works really well.

You will lose one stop so the f4 lens becomes f5.6. You would need to check if you can autofocus at this aperture on your body. In my experience with my 5 D mk3 AF is not adversely affected.

Thanks Grumps1974 - I am certainly one of the 'mere mortals' so the TC seems a cost-effectiive option.

 

[Prodriver]

From memory the max5 series takes place on race circuits like Brands Hatch and Silverstone, so you won't be able to get trackside without having PLI in place and probably a letter from an editor saying they are going to publish your work. Some series/teams have their own photographers and it might be possible to get access via this route but you will still need PLI in place. Hillclimbs and sprints are generally more relaxed in this area through they are getting stricter these days.

Even with trackside access, you will find your way quite a bit from the action at some of the circuits and I would recommend looking for a good Mk 1 100-400 which is a very versatile range, or the 300f4 prime which are both a bit outside your price range unless you sell your 70-200.

One thing to consider is that you'll likely be with your son in the paddock/pits until just before he heads out on track which gives you very limited time to reach anywhere other than the first corner or two during the race, as it can take 15-20 minutes to reach some parts of the longer circuits. It might be easier to take loads of photos in the paddock and pit lane areas that no-one else will be taking, and buy one or two from a pro photographer at each round as a lasting memory. That way you can enjoy the racing more instead of worrying about getting a perfect shot, especially if you have to shoot through a fence. It also means you won't miss any podium presentations which typically take place within minutes of the end of each race.

JohnStewart,

Max5 does race at circuits such as Croft, Pembrey, Anglesey, Donington and Silverstone and that's a really valid point regarding my whereabouts - hadn't really considered that! As for PLI - any idea what sort of cost that entails?

If I did sell the 70-200 I may stretch to a 100-400 or 300. I've always had zooms so may miss that option should I go for the 300 prime.....

I still have the 17-85 which I could use in the paddock etc as I could 'borrow' my son's 600D as a second body.

Never really bought any images - what's the likely cost of a few shots?

Nige

 

[MatBin]

Agree the 1.4 makes little difference to the IQ and AF on the 70/200 f4 on the IS version. Good combo. I also have 100/400 and 400 f5.6 and can't see as big difference between these and the 70/200 1.4 combo unless pixel peeping.
Matt

 

[Prodriver]

Agree the 1.4 makes little difference to the IQ and AF on the 70/200 f4 on the IS version. Good combo. I also have 100/400 and 400 f5.6 and can't see as big difference between these and the 70/200 1.4 combo unless pixel peeping.
Matt

Thanks Matt,

I have the standard 70-200f4 non-IS.......Is it worth the extra for the IS?

As you can probably see from my previous post I'm angling to take this 'opportunity' to 'upgrade' my gear.........although the consencus seems to be a 1.4TC is a good, cost effective option!

Nige

 

[JohnStewart]

JohnStewart,

Max5 does race at circuits such as Croft, Pembrey, Anglesey, Donington and Silverstone and that's a really valid point regarding my whereabouts - hadn't really considered that! As for PLI - any idea what sort of cost that entails?

If I did sell the 70-200 I may stretch to a 100-400 or 300. I've always had zooms so may miss that option should I go for the 300 prime.....

I still have the 17-85 which I could use in the paddock etc as I could 'borrow' my son's 600D as a second body.

Never really bought any images - what's the likely cost of a few shots?

Nige

PLI ranges from about £100 to £150 per year depending on who you go with. You are looking for a minimum of £5M cover.

Individual shots typically vary between about £5 to £10 each for a full size download for personal use that you can print from, but have a chat with those covering the series and explain you would be keen on buying a couple of shots from each round to see what deals might be available.

 

[Prodriver]

PLI ranges from about £100 to £150 per year depending on who you go with. You are looking for a minimum of £5M cover.

Individual shots typically vary between about £5 to £10 each for a full size download for personal use that you can print from, but have a chat with those covering the series and explain you would be keen on buying a couple of shots from each round to see what deals might be available.

Mmm, that sounds expensive for PL. Might be that I approach a pro who's covering the event as well as trying to get a few shots of my own.......

So you would recommend a 100-400 over a 300, if I were to sell the 70-200?

Another option might be to look at a 70-200 2.8 (non-IS) with a TC - although I seem to remember the 2.8 being considerably heavier than my f4?

 

[EdwardL]

Currently have a 7D with 17-85 and 70-200 f4 L and was wondering if there is any worthwhile upgrades, so needed your opinions.

I hate to put a dampener on things but my honest opinion is that with this combination you've got the equipment you need. The 70-200mm f/4 is a superb lens and is the one I use most, much more than the 24-105mm which is also a great lens.

I appreciate you've not got any images here and I've not seen any that you've produced but my guess is you might need more practice or if not, then some more technique in post processing. I hope this doesn't sound too strong or rude especially not seeing any of your results - purely based on the tone of your opening post. I'm answering your question very literally as I don't feel there are any "worthwhile upgrades". The only possibility might be a full frame camera but this would extend the budget a little too much.

Sharpening is a good skill to learn in post processing (loads of YouTube videos and various different techniques). And I assume you're using settings like: AI Servo, multiple shots, Centre-weighted Average metering, Single, central spot focus point, Av priority usually set to f/4, ISO of 200 for a sunny day, 400 for overcast and 800 for darker/heavy overcast and a shutter speed of 1/800 sec or better? Pardon this list being in total reverse order of priority!

I know, and appreciate, the wish to have better equipment and I don't want to stop you spending but the 7D is a perfectly good camera as far as I know and your lens is brilliant and perfect for the job! The f/2.8 is tempting but the DoF can turn into a problem and it's a heavy and cumbersome lens to use. I want one but keep reminding myself that the f/4 is something I can use all day without being exhausted with its weight.

 

[Prodriver]

I hate to put a dampener on things but my honest opinion is that with this combination you've got the equipment you need. The 70-200mm f/4 is a superb lens and is the one I use most, much more than the 24-105mm which is also a great lens.

I appreciate you've not got any images here and I've not seen any that you've produced but my guess is you might need more practice or if not, then some more technique in post processing. I hope this doesn't sound too strong or rude especially not seeing any of your results - purely based on the tone of your opening post. I'm answering your question very literally as I don't feel there are any "worthwhile upgrades". The only possibility might be a full frame camera but this would extend the budget a little too much.

Sharpening is a good skill to learn in post processing (loads of YouTube videos and various different techniques). And I assume you're using settings like: AI Servo, multiple shots, Centre-weighted Average metering, Single, central spot focus point, Av priority usually set to f/4, ISO of 200 for a sunny day, 400 for overcast and 800 for darker/heavy overcast and a shutter speed of 1/800 sec or better? Pardon this list being in total reverse order of priority!

I know, and appreciate, the wish to have better equipment and I don't want to stop you spending but the 7D is a perfectly good camera as far as I know and your lens is brilliant and perfect for the job! The f/2.8 is tempting but the DoF can turn into a problem and it's a heavy and cumbersome lens to use. I want one but keep reminding myself that the f/4 is something I can use all day without being exhausted with its weight.

EdwardL,

thanks for your candid comments and opinion......I 'fear' you may well be right!

I do use most of the above settings etc. but have very limited time for PP - indeed my 16 year old son who is doing GCSE photography has a far better understanding and practical application of Photoshop and the like.

I only shoot family and, since Josh is starting to race, that will now include motorsport. All I intended to do was to give my limited skills the best chance of getting decent results without spending hour upon hour on the PC......and, if that meant 'upgrading' then I was prepared to do that.

The 70-200 f2.8 did seem cumbersome when I had a quick look at my friend's lens and I don't really think that is a viable option. It was also the need to get closer - hence considering a TC or the 100-400 or a 70-200 f4 IS......

Nige

 

[MatBin]

Thanks Matt,

I have the standard 70-200f4 non-IS.......Is it worth the extra for the IS?

As you can probably see from my previous post I'm angling to take this 'opportunity' to 'upgrade' my gear.........although the consencus seems to be a 1.4TC is a good, cost effective option!

Nige

Most people think the IS version is a little sharper wide open than the non is, they are different lenses. 2.8 version is too big and heavy for me plus most agree at F4 on either lens there is little difference, if you need 2.8 that is a different matter of course.
Personally I would get a TC and see if it does what you need it to do, second hand ones come up and you will loose little if you sell it on, no moving parts of course, beware any fungus and you should be fine.
MN att

 

[JohnStewart]

Mmm, that sounds expensive for PL. Might be that I approach a pro who's covering the event as well as trying to get a few shots of my own.......

So you would recommend a 100-400 over a 300, if I were to sell the 70-200?

Another option might be to look at a 70-200 2.8 (non-IS) with a TC - although I seem to remember the 2.8 being considerably heavier than my f4?

I would go for the 100-400 for the flexibility it offers, and it will be lighter than a 70-200 f2.8 with a 1.4x or 2x convertor on it. You also don't need to worry about swapping lenses/convertors during a race and potentially miss some of the action. I really liked the 70-200 f4 that I had for a few years and got great results with it, but upgraded to the 2.8 IS for faster focussing in dim/cloudy/rainy conditions I frequently seem to encounter. The extra weight you notice to start with, but you soon get used to it. I never use the 70-200 with a convertor, as I also have a 300 2.8IS which gives me the reach, and I use that with a 1.4x convertor for when 300mm on it's own isn't enough and after that I simply crop.

As funds are tight, I've also seen decent results with the 70-300 IS lens (non L version), but the extra reach of the 100-400 still wins for trackside stuff unless you are quite close to the track.

 

[The Image Team]

If you opted to stick with your current 70-200 f4 and put a 1.4TC on you would have the equivalent of a 448mm lens because the 7d has a 1.6x cropped sensor. But you would have a 448mm f/9 which will make for some very dark shots unless the weather is fine and you are racing in the middle of the day. If you end up last race of the Saturday on a dull October day at Silverstone, it will be like shooting at the dead of night.

There are cheaper options out there. L series lenses are very expensive, even used. I paid £550 for a 100-400 L f4.5-5.6 IS just the other day and I got it cheap. For what you are looking to achieve a 'lesser' name might be in order. If I can be permitted a small plug, I'm selling a Sigma 120-400mm f4.5-5.6 with IS for £375. Its a bit on the heavy side when attached to a 1D but your lighter body will help out your neck muscles and it will let you keep hold of the 70-200f4 which is a great lens for small circuits and pit lane.

The other option is the 70-200 f2.8 and a x2 teleconverter. Yes, the f2.8 is quite a bit bigger than the f4 but its one hell of a lens. I just got mine and I love it. If you walk into a media centre at the race track, the f2.8s will nearly outnumber the photographers so its definitely a good motorsport lens too. Yours would be a 280 too because of the crop and being a wider aperture lens a teleconverter wouldn't bump up the stops too high either. My x2 teleconverter cost me less than £100 brand new. It was a gamble but it paid off because its actually pretty good.

And as discussed, the option of hiring a pro to do the work is available too which has lower setup costs but will have higher on-going costs.

 

[Prodriver]

JohnStewart & The Image Team

Guys, thanks very much for your input.......I must admit to leaning towards the 70-200 f4 (or maybe the f4 IS) with a TC as, having looked at the specs, I see the f2.8 and the 100-400 are nearly twice the weight. Are you able to use your 2.8 and the 100-400 hand-held?? Is the outlay for these worth it as I appreciate my f4 with a TC may not be great in low light??

Nige

 

[MatBin]

If you opted to stick with your current 70-200 f4 and put a 1.4TC on you would have the equivalent of a 448mm lens because the 7d has a 1.6x cropped sensor. But you would have a 448mm f/9 which will make for some very dark shots unless the weather is fine and you are racing in the middle of the day. If you end up last race of the Saturday on a dull October day at Silverstone, it will be like shooting at the dead of night.

Where did you get F9 from? F4 plus a 1.4 TC is F5.6 and you hardly notice the loss of light through the viewfinder, one stop loss for a 1.4 converter, 2 stops for a 2 times converter. Agreed you might struggle a bit for shutter speed or ISO in poor light but no more so than with the 100/400 f4.5/5.6 at the long end and the 70/200 would be 280mm ignoring the crop factor with a 1.4 converter.

 

[The Image Team]

JohnStewart & The Image Team

Guys, thanks very much for your input.......I must admit to leaning towards the 70-200 f4 (or maybe the f4 IS) with a TC as, having looked at the specs, I see the f2.8 and the 100-400 are nearly twice the weight. Are you able to use your 2.8 and the 100-400 hand-held?? Is the outlay for these worth it as I appreciate my f4 with a TC may not be great in low light??

Nige

Both the L series lenses are easy hand hold lenses unless you are shooting 100 cars exactly the same. For what you are doing it will be fine. Also, IS/OS while nice to have, isn't a necessity. I turn it off on every lens I get at first then play with it when it doesn't matter to get a feel for it. The Sigma system was ok but I preferred it turned off. The Canon 24-105 IS I have only used when playing about with the lens at the side of an A road, I have never actually used it at the track.

Where did you get F9 from? F4 plus a 1.4 TC is F5.6 and you hardly notice the loss of light through the viewfinder, one stop loss for a 1.4 converter, 2 stops for a 2 times converter. Agreed you might struggle a bit for shutter speed or ISO in poor light but no more so than with the 100/400 f4.5/5.6 at the long end and the 70/200 would be 280mm ignoring the crop factor with a 1.4 converter.

You are right. I've buggered up the maths slightly . Only the TC will affect the light to the sensor. Sorry, was knackered.

 

[Prodriver]

Guys - thanks for all your input - I have gone with a 1.4TC Mk2 and am delighted with the results so far!

I may well save up for a bigger zoom at some point..........and I'll be back asking your advice again!

Cheers,
Nice