| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Should I buy or wait
Eric Linsley, Photographer
 |
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 5:32 AM on 10.14.10 |
->> I just was wondering if i should buy a Mark 2N now to upgrade from my 20D or want a month or two and buy a mark 3. I'm not shooting a lot right now but want to start shooting more. Any advice would be helpful.
Thanks,
Eric |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
 |
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 6:35 AM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> What would waiting do to help you? If you're not shooting, why not just stick with what you have? |
|
Ryan Kelly, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Newport News | VA | USA | Posted: 8:36 AM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> If you're asking whether the mark 3 will drop in price significantly in just the span of the next month or two, doubtful. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington/Normal | IL | United States | Posted: 8:48 AM on 10.14.10 |
->> Lots of nice IIn's on the market these days. If your schedule is currently light, I'd buy now. That gives you some time to send it in to get it cleaned, checked, and tweaked before you need it every day.
The prices will drop more, but only you can do the calculations to see if it is financially beneficial to wait till they drop a little more. |
|
Wesley R. Bush, Photographer
 |
Murfreesboro | TN | U.S. | Posted: 9:12 AM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> If I wasn't shooting a lot right now, I wouldn't be buying a lot right now either. |
|
Eric Linsley, Photographer
|
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 9:12 AM on 10.14.10 |
->> Kevin- Waiting would just let me save up enough money for a mark 3.
Ryan- I'm not asking if the price or a mark 3 would drop significantly but just asking if I should shoot with what I have then buy a mark 3 or buy a mark 2n now and then shoot and save for something better or newer.
I was just looking for a professional body because whenever I talked to someone about shooting they tell me that first I would have to upgrade my body. |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 10:07 AM on 10.14.10 |
->> Why limit to just those 2?
I would actually shy away from the MarkIIn. Even though lots of people love them it is still much older technology and any body you get is going to have a lot more mileage on it and you run the risk of a breakdown.
The MarkIII is a good camera and definitely more "professional."
But you can look at the 7D. A lot of photographers use those as their second or even primary bodies. The image quality is good and noise is low. Add in the extra grip and you get more battery life as well as a vertical shutter button. |
|
Eric Linsley, Photographer
|
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 10:39 AM on 10.14.10 |
->> Thanks George that's another body I was thinking about if I got a new body.
What about between the 7D and the mark 3 because I could find a mark 3 for around the same price as the 7D. |
|
Michael Ivanin, Photographer
|
Oakville | On | Canada | Posted: 12:15 PM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> It depends on what are you planning to shoot. If you are planning to shoot a lot of sports you should go with mark 3, however if you plan to shoot some videos with DSLR then you should buy 7D. I don't see a point in buying an old technology like mark 2n. 20D is a good camera and if it lasted that long for you it probably will last another couple months. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington/Normal | IL | United States | Posted: 12:18 PM on 10.14.10 |
->> Love the apple/orange, canon/nikon, etc. threads.
Guess you need to ask yourself some more questions. Do you want/need video capabilities? Are you willing to risk getting a MKiii that may or may not have problems reported around the world? Is a MKIV a better choice and the wait worth it? Will a 1.6 or a 1.3 sized sensor be better? Will my clients view a 7D as a non-pro body? Would I be better off upgrading my glass instead?
Personally, I shoot 3 IIn's. I like the 1.3 sensor over the 1.6. The body in my opin is probably the best DSLR that Canon has put out to date. The 1D classic only has it beat on sync speed. I don't need/want video on my still camera, so for the time being the III & IV are out. In the past year, I've found 2 IIN's in almost NIB condition with very reasonable shutter counts. One I picked up for about $300 under the current going rate. They still take images that make it to national and international magazines, books, and newspapers.
Ask yourself the rest of the questions and you will find the answer to the one you posted above. |
|
Rob Shook, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 12:38 PM on 10.14.10 |
->> George, how is the mark III more "professional" than the mark II? I didn't really understand that.
Personally, the $500 jump in price from the II to the IIn isn't worth it, nor is the more than $1000 jump in price from the II to the III. This comes from owning the II, shooting with the IIn when I borrow from a friend when I need a second body, and renting the III and IV for work.
The image quality difference between the II and III is negligible unless you're in the dark and at ISO 1600 or 3200. Even then, the difference isn't huge. The frame-rate is helpful, but I don't expect that this is a consideration since you are also looking at the 7d.
The autofocus in the II, III, and IV is also very comparable. I generally shoot hockey with the IV, but when I need to use the II I'm not missing any shots, and there really isn't a big difference in performance.
If you want a camera now that will do everything, the 1d II can be had for as little as $550. Even with access to the latest and greatest, I shoot with mine 90% of the time because it is more than sufficient. |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 1:01 PM on 10.14.10 |
->> Rob, Mark III more "professional" than 20D. Sorry if my wording was off. Simply making comment on the original poster's comment he wanted a more professional camera. Though we all know that in the right hands any camera can make great photos. But for daily news/sports work a more rugged body with faster AF, etc. is a good thing to have.
I do think that though they are still viable, the Mark II and IIn are getting too old and you run more of a risk of massive, expensive failure buying one now. |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
|
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 2:21 PM on 10.14.10 |
->> "I'm not shooting a lot right now but want to start shooting more."
Shooting what more would be my first question.
Depending on what you are planning or hope to do, a 4x5 view camera might be a better choice or an old SX-70 or maybe a Canon 1D. Maybe you would be better off waiting and putting more money aside for a MkIII or get a new 7D.
I am truly not trying to be facetious, Identifying what you are doing is really the first step, especially when you or any of us cannot go out and afford to buy everything or anything we want. |
|
Eric Linsley, Photographer
|
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> I am going to start going and shoot more high school sports at the high school I graduated from and my go to some football games at some colleges around where I live and try to see if anyone is pregaming and try to make images from that. |
|
Margaret Bowles, Photographer
|
Tampa | FL | | Posted: 4:21 PM on 10.14.10 |
| ->> For what it's worth, I have a Mark IV, Mark III and a 7D. Since you will be shooting high school sports in the dark stadiums, you might be happier with the Mark III. My 7D is just fine in the daylight but is noisier than the Mark III and IV when all are set at higher ISO's. You do have to be careful when buying a Mark III, however. As you know, many of them have had focusing issues that can make you think you are the world's worst photographer. The bottom line is, if you can manage it, get a Mark IV. If not, and you are in dark stadiums, you will probably like the results of the Mark III better than the 7D. |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
|
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 5:26 AM on 10.15.10 |
->> Eric:
Dollars are tight, your not shooting much, and starting to shoot more. Again, sounds like you should stick with what you have and make that work until you have clear direction and more money to spend.
I wouldn't hesitate in a nano second buying a good used 1D Mark IIN. No, it's not a III or a IV but I had very good luck with with the ones I owned. Yep, had to replace a shutter and a few other odds and ends but you could also have that same risk with any used camera you purchase as well as the one you currently own. There once was a day when a 1D Mark II or IIN with a 20D made a pretty nice setup.
Good luck. |
|
Eric Linsley, Photographer
|
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 8:59 PM on 10.15.10 |
->> Hey guys I would like to thank everyone who responded to my post.
I have decided to go ahead a buy the mark2N and learn all and shoot with it and then go ahead from there.
When I get the camera I will go out and shoot and then post the pics here.
Thanks a lot guys!
Eric |
|
Patrick Murphy-Racey, Photographer
|
Powell | TN | USA | Posted: 10:12 PM on 10.15.10 |
| ->> 7D |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
|
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 12:06 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> Nothing wrong with a 2N. I do like 1 series bodies much more than the others. I have indeed shot and used almost all of them. I have a fairly sizable body of work shot with a 1DMkII that even includes a lot of national ads. It served me very well. My favorite Canon right now is my 1DMkIII.
Too much is made of upgrading. And with most everything just existing online, the 1D would be great for most shoots. |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 2:08 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> Whomever told you you need to "upgrade to a professional body" is a mook.
Up until I converted it to an IR, I would use my 20D all the time for full page mag portraits.
Likewise, with the 2N, I still use them and have absolutely no intention of upgrading to either the 3 or 4. Sure the 3 and 4 have better high ISO quality, faster FPS and larger file sizes, but; I shoot mostly pro/college and lit portraits, I rely on my timing rather than FPS and the 2N produces images that are about 85-90% of a mag double truck. Sooo I've kind of reached the point of diminishing returns. If you want to remain viable you need to control your costs.
To counter what George said above, another reason I'd opt for an older 2N over the 3 is because the 3 had the exact same problems the 2 had in terms of images being blurry unless you get a Blue Dot. The Blue Dot is basically the same as the difference between the 2 and 2N.
I was one of the loudest bitchers about the 2 and had 14 of them exchanged until I got ones that worked properly. They eventually exchanged all of them for 2Ns and I swore that I wouldn't upgrade anything until I knew all the bugs were ironed out. Alas, the 3 acted like the 2 and the 4 has/had it's own bizarre problems, only not as wide spread. So on top of not wanting to spend $30,000 upgrading a bunch of cameras, I mostly don't want to deal with the angst anymore. |
|
Michael Myers, Photographer
 |
Miami | Florida | USA | Posted: 2:39 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> "I'm not shooting a lot right now but want to start shooting more. Any advice would be helpful."
My first thought is to ask you "why" you're not shooting a lot right now. My experience is buying "bigger, better, fancier" doesn't do much to improve your photography. Specifically what is it that you want to do that you can't do now with what you've already got? ....and why/how will you be shooting more if you buy a new camera? I'd suggest you go to www.kenrockwell.com and read some of his thoughts on buying a "better" camera. As I see it, it's only if you're doing the best you can with what you've got, and the gear simply is incapable of doing something you need to do - only then should you be getting something "better".
A "better" camera may make it easier to do some things, but in no way will it make you a better photographer. Those places you talk about going to once you get the new camera - why not go there right now, with what you've got? |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 3:11 AM on 10.16.10 |
| ->> I think you did right by getting the mark IIn, great camera for an awesome price these days |
|
Eric Linsley, Photographer
|
West Haven | CT | USA | Posted: 9:52 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> Michael Myers- I am not buying a new body because I think it will improve my photography. I think I do a great job and produce some nice work with what I have. I'm upgrading cause when I look for any type of photography work I run across people saying they are looking for photographers with a 1D series body.
Now I'll have 2 good bodies for my 70-200 f/2.8L and one for my 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS lens. |
|
Kelvin Ma, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boston | MA | | Posted: 10:46 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> Eric, I'll echo what Thomas wrote:
"Whoever told you you need to "upgrade to a professional body" is a mook."
Any client who is worth his or salt should be vetting you by the quality of your work, not by what kind of cameras you have. These days, only in very rare situations will camera resolutions come in to play, but a conversation worth having never starts with equipment.
When the first thing a client asks of me is what kind of equipment I use, I generally see that as a red flag that they probably don't recognize — or value — quality photography.
If equipment is that important to them, they'll let you expense a rental. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 11:38 AM on 10.16.10 |
->> If people are telling him that (potential clients) then it doesn't matter if they are jackasses.
They are potential clients and he seems to be losing business because of it. It is a pretty darn cheap fix to be honest and I am sure it will pay for itself within a few months.
And there is also nothing wrong with upgrading from a 20D to something a little more recent or "professional".
Not sure why people keep arguing that point that the client are douche bags. Again if clients keep mentioning it, then maybe he should just spend the grand and get one. |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
|
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 4:48 PM on 10.16.10 |
| ->> Regardless of your gear...just start shooting, master your craft, and enjoy. |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 9:09 PM on 10.16.10 |
| ->> One thing listening to Ken Rockwell is like going to jail and dropping the soap. He makes tests on equipment he never touches he is a joke on anyone taking his opinions seriousily. Until he got a Leica m9 he said never shoot on raw. Just because a guy has a website that gets a lot of hits doesn't mean he knows what he is talking about. His stuff is aimed towards non pros. |
|
Bob Nichols, Photographer
 |
Tipton | IN | USA | Posted: 9:50 PM on 10.16.10 |
->> From the SportsShooter Classified Ads:
"1d or nikon Equivalent pro body with 300 2.8 minimum."
"Must have a 70-200mm F2.8."
"Minimum equipment would be a high-end prosumer DSLR and 70-200 2.8 lens."
"You must have a 300mm f2.8 to cover this game."
"You need a prosumer (or better) camera (D700, D300, Canon equivalent) and knowledge of how to use your flash."
"Must have a 300mm f2.8 to cover field sports."
While several ads currently on the site refer to certain lenses needed to apply for an assignment, there are a couple referring to a certain body "or better" to apply for the job. These type of requirements regularly appear on SS.
The SS ads are the first thing I thought of when Eric said "I was just looking for a professional body because whenever I talked to someone about shooting they tell me that first I would have to upgrade my body."
I am not saying this practice is wrong. Obviously the employer has the right to require whatever they want. I am just stating that this is a common occurrence on SS. |
|
Brian Blanco, Photographer
|
Tampa / Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 10:51 PM on 10.16.10 |
->> Bob,
Kelvin Ma (5 posts up) pretty much nailed it.
Freelancing Rule #1 - Never send out invoices on a Friday
Freelancing Rule #2- Never work for a client that asks what type of gear you own... especially if you own what they're looking for.
Freelancing Rule #3- (Recently Added) Never remind the guys who shoot little league that it's actually little league.
-Blanco |
|
Patrick Fallon, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Columbia | MO | USA | Posted: 11:17 PM on 10.16.10 |
->> A few thoughts...
Bob: Those "assignments" pay typically $75-150 per day. Pretty low ball rates that would take a ton of working days just to make back the investment in gear - I would not buy a pro body and 300mm just so I could get those gigs. I hate clients that ask what gear I have. Want to know what I can produce? Look at my portfolio.
That said the equipment requirements are often there due to the type of event or poor location lighting on scene - as well as being used as a way of weeding out the amateurs.
Eric should not be worrying about trying to make those people happy with the standard pix they want so much as he should be making himself happy with quality visual work that will stand out in a portfolio.
Eric: a 1DmkIIN at $1K is a fantastic camera at a solid price, use and love that camera as much as I do. Save the rest of your cash for better glass: its an investment that does not lose value like bodies do.
If it were not for video I would not upgrade from the pair I have now until they finally bit the dust.
As for making pictures that are "portfolio worthy" - pictures that will make people go wow and make you happy:
Look at the work Chris Detrick (http://chrisdetrick.com/blog/ ), Al Bello (http://albello.com/ ), Donald Mirialle (http://www.donaldmiralle.com/ ) have, to name a few.
Look at the images in the CPOY archive of Sports Portfolios, features, and action:
http://www.cpoy.org/
Look at the POYi Archive:
http://www.poyi.org/
While some of these were shot with "old" cameras - long glass, medium glass, or even just a 35mm (my personal favorite) they all have something in common is how each of these photographers sees light, color, moment and composition.
The three photogs above are ALWAYS moving around, always looking to be AWAY from the pack. They are looking for a different image from the norm.
Getting away from the pack is something I still struggle with. Below are a few points some great photogs have shared with me that I constantly remind myself of, these are issues I still have but try to work through:
*Not just making the standard picture but making something portfolio worthy every time you are out shooting.
*Sometimes you will have a client to pay you to cover some awesome situation with wonderful light - but many times that is not the case, so you are better off going to a high school game or pee wee football game during the "golden hour" and making sweet images in awesome light.
*Get to know the coaches and shoot in the locker rooms, the half time speeches. You won't get that access in NCAA or NFL.
*Slow down your shutter and shoot a blur, go overhead, go low, go backlit, do something, anything but what everyone else is doing. Because if everyone else can do it - than its not that special really.
I hope this helps.
Patrick
http://www.patrickfallonphoto.com/blog/ |
|
Brad Barr, Photographer
|
Port St. Lucie | FL | USA | Posted: 10:08 AM on 10.17.10 |
->> The 7d would be my pick over the mk2n. Better AF and much better low iso capabilities. For the price its pretty hard to beat in the canon lineup.
Night and or indoor sports make the iso capabilities a top priority. You didnt mention what you would be shooting however.
not wanting to start a brand war, but might be a good opportunity to atleast check out the other side. The d700 is an especially good value right now...... |
|
Brad Barr, Photographer
|
Port St. Lucie | FL | USA | Posted: 10:09 AM on 10.17.10 |
| ->> ooops...that should read high iso capabilities above. (or low light) :-) I mixed them sorry. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 1:12 PM on 10.17.10 |
->> Perception is an important if sometimes irrational part of any business venture. Controlling perception is important. Just buying a big "professional" camera won't get you clients, but for certain types of work it is a necessary part of your "wardrobe".
Every now and again the "dress properly for a shoot" thread comes up around here. Dressing appropriately for a shoot has nothing to do with your shooting ability and everything to do with visually representing yourself as a professional. Beefing up the gear when appropriate - even if it really doesn't have anything to do with image quality - doesn't hurt if you are being compensated properly for the effort.
If you're doing commercial studio shoots with models, celebs, dignitaries, executives, etc., a certain amount of "overhead" makes your subjects and clients feel at ease. Having a couple of friendly assistants, a craft table with drinks and snacks, a makeup artist, a well-lit mirror, some comfortable seating, monitors, a pretty decent lighting and grip setup, even a medium format camera are all part of the "set". If you do work for an ad agency, they will usually insist on this overhead - if for no other reason than to make more money from the markup of your services.
From a technical standpoint, you might be able to do the photo in a basement solo with one monolight and a 20D. But unless you've developed a really good reputation and people trust you to get it done with a monolight and a 20D (i.e. it becomes part of your "lore"), it's advisable to do what is expected for a certain class of shooting if you want to have success. Fighting perception takes a lot of time and effort, all of which adds to the overall cost of your venture.
There are some shoots where this "overhead" is not a factor. Sometimes you will have assignments with no direct client or subject contact. A lot of studio/product work, some exterior architecture gigs, some wildlife/nature/landscape photography. All the client will see is the end product. In those situations, who cares what you use as long as it meets the technical standards for the shoot? If you can get it done naked covered in grape jelly shooting with a pair of tricked out LOMOs, it really doesn't matter as long as the images are good.
It's an odd dance. The most important thing to remember is whatever you do, make sure you are running the business and doing the math to make sure you are being fairly compensated. If you are in a situation that demands foofery and the client only wants to pay you $100 for the gig, you need a new client. |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 6:08 PM on 10.17.10 |
| ->> Buy |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 6:08 PM on 10.17.10 |
| ->> Wait |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|