Canon Rebel XTi vs OlympusEVOLT E-510?
Getting ready to purchase our first DSLR. I have seen several comments about night action shots being difficult for both but more so on the Olympus. Going to be using for mostly High school Fast pitch games, many at night. Does anyone have an opinion on either of these for this use? Night use is main concern...

Comments (8)

You will need a very fast lens. You can get as fast as f/1.4 and go ISO1600 on Canon. Not sure if you would like the Olympus high ISO handling (smaller sensor). The stabilization will not help you for motion blur.VictorBucuresti, Romania

Comment #1

Thank you, Victor! I also just read a piece of advice to go with the largest sensor you can find with the smallest pixell you can stand...

Comment #2

Novice36 wrote:.

Thank you, Victor! I also just read a piece of advice to go with thelargest sensor you can find with the smallest pixell you can stand..

I think you meant smallest megapixel count which would mean the largest pixels actually..

The e-510 is very good but I think the Canon is probably somewhat better for this kind of task...

Comment #3

Yes, I guess I did. Thanks so much for the help, clarification and patience, this is a great forum!..

Comment #4

These were from the stands with a kit lens. A faster lens and you can do much better. These were taken at like ISO 1600 and F5.3..

The man with the fastes lens wins!!!.


Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Olympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #5

And decide how ambitious (and rich!) you are feeling..

For instance, if you're going to want to photograph a catch in the outfield, in a night game, you're dealing with both a long distance (usually you can't be close to the entire outfield at once...) and poor lighting. I wouldn't be surprised if there were lights near the home, first and third, but there aren't going to be lights in the middle of the outfield. Poor lighting + stop-action + flash essentially not an option (very impolite, even if you have a very powerful flash setup) = high ISO + very wide-open aperture, and quite possibly still an underexposure..

Ex I shot adult slow-pitch on a badly lit municipal field a while back. Evening games. I checked one of my shots batting, where there actually *was* some light, and it was 1/200s (would have preferred 1/500s), f/3.2, ISO 3200, 147mm as shot and might have been pushed during post processing by .5-1 stops. Been a while. And regarding that focal length,.

(1) I was likely very near first base at that time, right outside the foul line check where you'll be allowed to be.

(2) That's using a Four-Thirds camera and lens, so the FOV across diagonal resembles that of a 294mm lens on a 35mm frame..

Of course, that shot was also taken well after sunset. hm, ~3:11 AM GMT on October 30, was PDT at the time,7h back? = ~8:11pm, almost exactly two hours after sunset. Didn't help that I was shooting an E-1 at the time, not the fastest at low-light C-AF nor at it's best at extreme high-ISO photography..

(If you're morbidly curious.


Substitute _l for _f to save some bandwidth. Not the technically best I've done.).

Second, if you're going to want to switch rapidly between targets at different distances like switching from an outfielder throwing to second, to a runner going for home you are either working with a varifocal lens, or you are shooting with a lens so short relative to your distance that both will fit but one looks tiny. Unless you're far enough that both are similarly far away....

If you're going for a less ambitious goal, like just covering home and 1st and if both are well-lit, you may have an easier time. Otherwise, this can get very expensive very quickly..

Ex. for the Olympus, if you're trying this as a single shooter IOW, not coordinating with any others and if you're trying to cover the whole field, the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD is probably a good start... if you're willing to underexpose and postprocess as appropriate. I have the older non-SWD version, which is hampers AF speed. The 90-250mm f/2.8 would be sweet if you don't have the field access that I had (or the reflexes to dodge the odd bad throw!), but is FAR more expensive and heavy. Going the other direction, there's an old 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5, which should be cheap, but it's shorter and the f/4.5 will somewhat aggravate the problems with low-light respective to f/3.5..

For the Canon, you'd probably want to look into a 70-200mm f/2.8 slightly faster than the 50-200 mm f/2.8-3.5, although with a slightly wider FOV at the long end. I'd steer away from anything that's f/4-5.6... Alternate approach: if you're going to be far away so that short focal lengths are not meaningful, maybe a fast fixed-length telephoto like the 200mm f/2.8. Or longer, if you have the $. Olympus has the 300mm f/2.8, but you really don't want to know the price and weight, I think..

At least with both cameras, you may have decent room for cropping if you're not going for largish prints...

Comment #6

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Http:// ball still motion-blurredf/3.5, ISO 800, 130mm, EV -0.318:54 PDT.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

1/400s, f/3.5, ISO 1600, 200mm, EV -0.319:09 PDT.

Shows the uncropped FOV of 200mm (Four-Thirds format, approximately what you'd get for 250mm on the Canon EF-S format modulo the aspect ratio difference) not too far from the fence. Could have used some additional sharpening, but this might have been due to applying some noise reduction ISO 1600 was already pushing it on an E-1..

Both with the E-1. Either camera you've mentioned would be far better in terms of chroma noise, and a fair bit better on AF these are mostly to give some ideas of exposure settings and FOV vs focal length...

Comment #7

Incredible! Thanks a bunch!!! I can appreciate the "reflex" warnings as it takes a lot longer to get up from a crouched position these days!!..

Comment #8

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.

This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.


Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |


(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.