Indoor sports shooting to outdoor wildlife .suggestions on lenses and body

[shoturtle]

Originally Posted by jmp2204

well the video is an added bonus, i find now with my s5is i rarely pick up my camcorder for the kids birthdays and stuff. Locally right now a camera shop has the 50d on for the same price as the t2i ,so i would jump on that if not for the video....

The T1i shoots hd but just not as well as the T2i. But my big issue with dslr shooting video is that is the camera is moving, you get a jelly effect form the larger aperture. So my HD camcorder still does a better job then my T1i on video. I have only used the HD feature 2x since I got it last may or june. And both were just testing it out. It has not been used since.

[FaithfulPastor]

[QUOTE=JohnG;1091949]a couple notes:
1) 70-200 2.8 lenses. For sports work, you wont get any benefit from IS. The only benefit will be to non-sports work. So, you really need to be sure you'll NEED IS before you actually pay for it. If you don't have a burning need for IS then the sigma 70-200 2.8 is an excellent choice. I used one for years shooting sports and it's a good performer. About 90% of what the canon version is. You'll want the extra 50mm over the 50-150 in my opinion.

JohnG makes a good point, you will not need the IS in every setting.

But if you buy a lens with IS, you can turn it off. If you buy a lens without IS, then one day you might decide you really need it. You'll sell your non - IS lens and probably lose some money. Whereas, if you buy the IS lens up front, you're good for all situations.

My first 70-200 lens was the Sigma HSM version. I liked it, but with my own less-than-steady hands, I chose to sell it and buy the a used canon 70-200 IS lens. I wish I had bought the canon first.

That's all I got.

[jmp2204]

I'd like to thanks everyone for the advice and responding to my thread , it has been very informative . i will be getting the t2i and shooting for the recomended lenses that have been suggested .

[peripatetic]

Originally Posted by shoturtle

The human eye is F1 which is the gold standard.

To take this completely off-topic. The human eye is about f3.5 - f8. So not terribly fast. Even a cheap camera has optics that are way better than the mess evolution left us with.

But our cones are pretty good at low light imaging (only in mono though).

And we've got some awesome image processing hardware just behind the eye. :-)

p.s. you got some good advice on the camera and lenses. :-)

[TCav]

Originally Posted by jmp2204

I'd like to thanks everyone for the advice and responding to my thread , it has been very informative . i will be getting the t2i and shooting for the recomended lenses that have been suggested .

The T2i is a fine camera. I'm certain it will work well for you. Good luck with it.

[shoturtle]

Originally Posted by peripatetic

To take this completely off-topic. The human eye is about f3.5 - f8. So not terribly fast. Even a cheap camera has optics that are way better than the mess evolution left us with.

But our cones are pretty good at low light imaging (only in mono though).

And we've got some awesome image processing hardware just behind the eye. :-)

p.s. you got some good advice on the camera and lenses. :-)

Actually when I was younger I had 20/18 vision. I had fantastic night vision. So the human eye can get to f1 when everything if healthy. My wife still had 20/15 vision. And she does no have as good night vision as I do at 20/25 currently.

[TCav]

Originally Posted by shoturtle

Actually when I was younger I had 20/18 vision. I had fantastic night vision. So the human eye can get to f1 when everything if healthy. My wife still had 20/15 vision. And she does no have as good night vision as I do at 20/25 currently.

Visual acuity (expressed as 20/20, 20/15, 20/25, etc.) is the sharpness of vision, and has nothing to do with either focal length or pupil diameter. Therefore it can't be expressed as an f/number.