View Single Post
Old Feb 2, 2008, 10:13 AM   #11
JohnG
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

adilj wrote:
Quote:
Hello there. Im back with some questions. Ok, my first concern is that do we have to buy bodies and lens separate. I mean cant there be dslr's with enough zoom. Like Sony H-9, it has around 12x zoom and takes great pictures.

Second thing is, even if I go with Canon 400d, the lens I'm getting is ef-s18-55mm, f/3.5-5.6. I mean to say my fuji has better than this. Please comment on this.

And please can anyone tell me the price you have it in your country.

Looking forward. Thanks.
Ahh, now you've stumbled into it :-)

EVERY camera purchase is a compromise. That's why camera manufacturers make digicams, superzooms and DSLRs. Because each has a market. You are absolutely right - the H-9 takes some great pictures. In many cases it would be extremely difficult to tell those pictures apart from a DSLRs. Low light sports is NOT one of those instances. Unfortunately, as I keep saying, there is NO CHEAP EASY SOLUTION FOR LOW LIGHT SPORTS. It does not exist. Believe me, if it existed I'd be using it.

And yes, the kit lens is completely incapable of the task you want to use the camera for. The kit lens for ANY dslr is not capable of the task. I have already suggested suitable lenses for the task and the benefits / drawbacks. You have a requirement that requires very expensive equipment to satisfy. But realize, most people that buy a camera do NOT have this requirement. That is why so many digicams, so many superzooms and so many DSLRs with kit lenses are sold. Because few people require what you require - low light sports shooting capability.

The other thing that is important to understand is: a larger zoom range does NOT equate to higher quality. No matter what camera or system we are talking about - the larger the zoom range the more compromises are made in the construction of the lens to keep costs down. And especially when shooting sports, QUALITY is important. That is why so many professional sports shooters use a prime (non zooming lens). Why? Because the quality is many times better than a zoom. I realize you're not a pro and not aspiring to be one. But I'm trying to break you of the brainwashing that marketing has done. The brainwashing goes like this:

Single most important camera feature = number of megapixels

Second most important feature = zoom range

That simple is not true. But it's simple. It's 2 simple numbers that make marketing easier.

So, here's an example that proves all of that to be nonsense: For professional sports photographers, the most widely used sports camera body is only 8 mp. My gosh, digicams have 12mp - why don't they sell their current camera and buy a $600 12mp digicam? And hey, they are using lenses that have 1x zoom (e.g. 400mm 2.8). What, digicams have 12x zoom easy. So it's a no-brainer - for $600 they could get 12x zoom and 12mp. And yet for some strange reason the pros dont do this. Why? because mp and zoom range are far down the list of the features that result in quality photos.

BUT, at least for SPORTS and low light sports especially the features that DO equate to quality cost a lot of money. Those are:

Camera with great continuousfocus system (which right now is Canon DSLR, Nikon DSLR and Sony (A700 only)). They require great high ISO performance - often ISO 3200 (only certain bodies in those systems). They require f2.8 lenses. AND they require lenses with enough REACH for the specific sport. Note, 'Reach' doesn't mean more zoom it means more maximum focal length.

So you have to decide how important that one requirement is to you. There are a lot of less expensive options that will yield wonderful results for most other types of photography - but they cant do low light sports well. There is no way to do low light sports without spending money on the right equipment - and a kit lens is not the right equipment.

JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote