Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   What Camera Should I Buy? (
-   -   need a camera for baseball pics (

redstorm1387 May 30, 2009 11:10 AM

need a camera for baseball pics
I am thinking about a leica C-LUX3. I would like to stay below 600 dollars. Any helpful ideas for me would be great

robbo May 30, 2009 12:04 PM

OK, but limited zoom unless you are right on the field
My experience with baseball (mostly MLB at Safeco Field in Seattle) has taught me this: the more zoom, the better. The camera you are considering tops out at about 125mm. That's ok if you're right on the field and focusing on home plate and the infielders. However, I think you would do better with a superzoom or an entry level DSLR with a zoom lens. As examples of superzooms, I suggest the Panasonic FZ28, the Canon SX10, the Sony H50, and the Olympus SP590. For DSLR's, you might try getting a Sony A200 with a 70-300 zoom lens from Tamron or Sigma or a Pentax K2000 or a Canon XS with a similar lens. Those zoom lens cost under $200 and are not the best but they are ok, certainly good enough for day games.

Photo 5 May 30, 2009 3:33 PM

I'd ask John G who is our resident sport photography excerpt for advice, but from what he has said before the more zoom length the better and sometimes you need more than 300mm.


Biro May 30, 2009 5:11 PM

And, just to put a technical point on it, a 300mm lens on a DSLR with an APS-C sized sensor (and that's virtually any DSLR under $1500), will give you the equivalent of 450mm. That makes it at least competitive with the point-and-shoot superzooms like the Panasonic FZ28 (486mm) and the Canon SX10 IS (560mm). And a DSLR will offer other advantages in terms of image quality and rapid response. But a DSLR with that kind of lens will also be much larger and heavier than a point-and-shoot megazoom and more expensive.

The Panasonic FZ28 can be had for $300 or slightly less right now. The Canon SX10 IS can be had for well under $400. One of the DSLRs mentioned above with the short kit lens and a 70-300mm lens from Sigma or Tamron might just squeeze in at the $600-$700 range if you do your shopping and bargain hard. But it is possible. Here are some examples:

Note that in these offers, the 70-300mm lenses are from Sony and Canon. Of these two specific deals, I would recommend the Sony for two reasons: First, the short 18-70mm kit lens offers a longer zoom range for general walking around purposes. And second, because the image stabilization is in the camera body, both lenses are stabilized. With the Canon, the short lens is stabilized but the long one - the one that arguably needs stabilization the most - is not. You might be able to save a bit more money: Adorama sells the Sony A200 with the 18-70mm kit lens for $499 and the Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD lens (with six-year warranty) for $169... for a grand total of $668 versus $699 for the total Sony kit.

And here's another idea, although a bit more expensive - the Olympus E-520. Because this camera has a four-thirds sensor, its 300mm lens gives you the equivalent of 600mm:

redstorm1387 May 31, 2009 5:27 PM

Panasonic FZ28 is the one I am gonna try thanks for your help

mtclimber Jun 1, 2009 12:48 AM


The FZ-28 is a very good choice.

Sarah Joyce

Mark1616 Jun 2, 2009 6:24 AM

Before you spend your money are you talking about shooting from the stands or are you hoping to shoot more local games from the ground? Are you looking for just keep sakes for you or a higher standard shot?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:27 AM.