Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 3, 2009, 3:49 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5
Default

Hi, I asked a simialr question last week and have done more shopping into cameras since then. This will be my first move from digital to SLR and my phtots will be for personal use only. To have good photos and memories of my family in their sports.

One daughter is JV tennis and there tourneys and play are outdoors. So light is not a problem, just the lens to stop the action.

My other daughter is middle school cheerleader and we both barrel race. These activities are alot outdoors but some barrel racing is in a covered arena - so low lighting.

I had decided to buy the canon XSI with the basic lense 18-55mm and then purchase another zoom lens for closer shots. My dad, who has done alot of photgrapgy in his life, also suggested me to look at the Nikon D60 - good value for the price.

What advise would someone have who knows both cameras . Again this is for personal use and would like to keep under $1000. I have seen several packages this weekend for either camera, the 18-55 lense and then a 55-200 f/4 for Nikon and additional lense 55-250f/4 for canon.

i really appreciate ya'lls help for some one who is not sure of camera or lenses!!! I'm use to sports mode, 3 burst and go!! haha also I can usually get on ground level withmost of the sports mentioned. other than that I would use it for basic family and friend gatherings.




makin is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 4, 2009, 8:51 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

For sports work the D60 just is a poor choice - it's AF system is too stripped down. The AF system 'strip down' is one of the things (along with removing focus motor) nikon did in the d40/d60 to bring the price down. Nikon's d90 and d300 are great sports cameras but the d40/d60 are not. If you were at that level of camera it's a much more interesting debate - Canon vs. Nikon. But at the entry level it's no contest. The XSi has the best focus system of any entry level camera in any system.

Remember though - my comments from your first post haven't changed. For the indoor barrel riding, you will not be able to get decent shots with a zoom lens (zoom lens' have a max aperture of 2.8) at ISO 1600. You will need to buy a prime lens which severely limits your flexibility. Using the 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8 lenses (least expensive options) you're looking at a 15-30 foot range max to get good shots. And remember, it's a fixed focallength so if the rider is too close to you you won't fit them in the frame. So, bottom line is you'll probably only be able to position yourself for shots around 1 barrel. And that's if the facility has great lighting - which it may not. It's quite possible that even with a 1.8 lens you won't be able to get the shutter speeds you need.

The ISO 1600 will be a severely limiting factor for indoor barrel racing. If that part is important you're better off spending the extra money now on the 500d (or d90 in Nikon's camp).

If you can accept the fact you won't be able to get indoor barrel racing shots then the xsi is a great choice.

A good choice of lens for the outdoor tennis and outdoor barrel racing in good light is one of the following:

Sigma 70-200 2.8 (plus 1.4x TC) - lot of flexibility

Canon 70-300 IS USM (most reach - good for barrel racing)

Canon 70-200 f4L (non IS) - best focus speed and best image quality but you'll give up some reach for barrel racing.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2009, 10:55 AM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

If you want to consider a refurbished camera with a 90 Day warranty, I noticed that Adorama has EOS-30D kits for $549.95 right now. That would give you ISO 3200 with better build quality compared to the current entry level models.

http://www.adorama.com/ICA30DKR.html

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2009, 12:42 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5
Default

Thanks for you help when I know some is repeatative. I dont want to make a wrong choice for the amount of cost-esp for a newby to SLRs. Bear with me I have just a couple of more ?s.

1. I looked at the 70-200 f4L. What is the difference btwn IS and NON IS.

2. From what I can tell, ISO 1600 wont cut it for covered arenas. I would need another choice with higher ISO. is that correct?

3. I have a kodak Z710 I can keep using for close family shots and more a less point and shoot stuff. That being said , would I be better off spending my money onjust the basic camera and add a lense seperately (like the 70-200or 70-300) without the cost of the standard lense 18-55. I would just use two cameras for two different situations I hope this makes sense or I may be way off???.

4. And with all that confusion being said, covered arenas are the least of importance at this time, would be a nice perk but maybe too costly all up front.

Thanks again for all you help. Its a big step for me and I want to get at least part of it right first time out!!!
makin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2009, 1:01 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
1. I looked at the 70-200 f4L. What is the difference btwn IS and NON IS.
About $500 in cost. IS is technology that helps reduce camera shake. But it does nothing for sports work because it doesn't freeze a subject's motion. Now, the IS version of the f4 is also sharper than the non-IS version. But, since you're doing sports work and the 70-200 f4IS sells for the same price as the 70-200 2.8 (non IS) you'd be much better off buying the 70-200 2.8. In reality, for your level of use, you'd be better off saving a few hundred $$ and getting the sigma 70-200 2.8.

Quote:
2. From what I can tell, ISO 1600 wont cut it for covered arenas. I would need another choice with higher ISO. is that correct?
Maybe - maybe not. If it were a professional basketball arena, you MIGHT get by with ISO 1600 and f2.8. Short of that caliber of lighting you MIGHT get by with ISO 1600 and 1.8 - but you might not. If it were important to you I would absolutely suggest a camera with ISO 6400 capability (Nikon d90, Canon 50d, 500d).

Quote:
3. I have a kodak Z710 I can keep using for close family shots and more a less point and shoot stuff. That being said , would I be better off spending my money onjust the basic camera and add a lense seperately (like the 70-200or 70-300) without the cost of the standard lense 18-55. I would just use two cameras for two different situations I hope this makes sense or I may be way off???.
I would still advise you to get the kit lens - it really usually adds $100 or less and it's very nice for the cost. You'd be losing out on a LOT of shooting opportunities and only saving a few dollars. I would get the kit lens.

Quote:
4. And with all that confusion being said, covered arenas are the least of importance at this time, would be a nice perk but maybe too costly all up front.
Here's the rub though. This indoor shootiing drives everything. To accomplish it, you'll likely need an f2.8 lens AND ISO 6400 capable camera. So, if you want to do it down the road, your initial purchase should include one of those two items. My advice is, get the 500D. It only costs $100 more than the XSi and you get ISO 6400 vs. 1600. That's the biggest bang for $100 you can possibly get. Then get either the 70-200 or 70-300 Canon lens for the outdoor stuff. Down the road you can get a lens to do the indoor work. For $100 extra it's a no-brainer IMO as a sports photographer. The only problem with the 500D is it may be a few weeks till it's in stock. But IMO you'll grow to regret that decision just to save $100 and a couple weeks.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2009, 2:02 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5
Default

ok THANKS JOHN. THIS IS MAKING MORE SENSE AND IT DOES SOUND LOGICAL TO GET THE 500D FOR NO MORE DIFFERNECE IN PRICE. IS THE 500D THE SAME AS THE T1i ???
makin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2009, 2:17 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

The 500D is officially called the t1i.

It just came out so availability is low. Turns out I was mistaken though - price difference between it and the XSi is $200, not $100 as I first indicated. I still think it's worth it. 1600 is very limiting for sports work.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2009, 7:31 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 112
Default

[QUOTE=JohnG;966312]
You will need to buy a prime lens which severely limits your flexibility. Using the 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8 lenses (least expensive options) you're looking at a 15-30 foot range max to get good shots.


Question about this...when you say 15-30 foot range do you mean I would need to be that close to what I want to take the picture of? I am looking at a prime lens down the road and was thinking 100 or 135mm. I think the 200 will be too much zoom and cost way too much....
spinning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2009, 7:40 AM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spinning View Post
Question about this...when you say 15-30 foot range do you mean I would need to be that close to what I want to take the picture of? I am looking at a prime lens down the road and was thinking 100 or 135mm. I think the 200 will be too much zoom and cost way too much....
If your subject is a human - yes. As I recall you were interested in swimming/diving. The 85 would be a very poor choice for that - not enough reach and the 50mm would be useless. For swimming, even short course 70-200 is pretty much required. The 135mm 2.0 costs $1,000. A Sigma 70-200 2.8 costs $800. Diving I don't do enough of to say what focal length is good. But 25 feet is about the working range of the 85 for a human (I said 30 in the other post because there was a horse involved - larger target = better chance at focus accuracy).
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2009, 10:04 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 112
Default

Ok thanks...that is what I thought you meant.
We were at a dive meet on Sat and one of the parents had a 200MM Prime lens it brought her too close on the boards closest to us. Which seems to be about the distance the stands are from the boards at most colleges. High school you are lower and closer to the boards. She had the lens mainly for gymnastics. That is why I was thinking of going with 135 prime.
I do like the idea of a 70-200 but wasnt' sure how that would work out in the end. Luckily I am not buying an extra lens at first so I can see what I can do with the kit.
Sondra
spinning is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:48 AM.