Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 6, 2008, 5:04 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 31
Default

I am not a professional. I enjoy taking pictures of my kids sporting events and sharing them with friends and family. I also shoot some sr. picture type shots of my daughter and her friends just for fun. Indoor Volleyball, Swimming, and football. I am only considering upgrading because I'm having difficulty capturing the photos I want especially in the poor lighting in gyms/pools . . . the the S2IS only has max 400 ISO. Will I be able to get better results with the Sony Alpha A300? What lenses would I need? I just don't want to spend a ton of $$ with-out achieving better results.

The below shots are representative of what I'm taking. . . . I totally understand that these are not great shots, but considering the conditions, I'm still taking better pictures than most of my friends.



<a href="http://lh5.ggpht.com/margstamps/SHE8...0/IMG_0623.JPG" /></a>



<a href="http://lh3.ggpht.com/margstamps/SGZ9...0/IMG_2163.JPG" /></a>

http://picasaweb.google.com/margstam...19077229247922

<a href="http://lh4.ggpht.com/margstamps/SHE7...0/IMG_7831.JPG" /></a>
margstamps is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 6, 2008, 5:11 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Take a look at the Sports & Action Photosforum, and see what those people are using.

For indoor sports (Volleyball) you'll need a medium telephoto lens with a large aperture (f/2.0 or larger.) Sony's selection of lenses like that is lean and ones they've got are expensive. Canon, Nikon, and Pentax have better lens choices, and Canon is a clear favorite of sports photographers.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2008, 6:53 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

Canon does seem to be the best for sport shooting. The A300 would most likely be better than the Powershot, but I'd look at Canon first. The one complaint I had when I looked at the A350 was with it's viewfinder (the viewfinder is smaller because of the way they did the live view). It's really small and I know it would bother me very quickly, and I don't think live view on a dSLR is as useful as it is on a small camera. I know I can't hand-hold a dSLR still at arm's length - it's way too heavy for me to hold still (even with stabilization).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 10:08 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 31
Default

Thanks TCav and mtngal for your input. I've been studying and I think that I'm going to go with the XSi. The 40dappeals to me but I honestly can't afford it. I was looking at the XTi as well, but it seems like there were maybe enough improvements between the 2 models to justify going with the XSi. Now I just need to figure out the lens situation. with my IS2 I would shoot "dark" and adjust at home. The result is very grainy pictures, sometimes blurry as well . . . but still better than no picture at all.

Once again, thanks for your time.


margstamps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 1:41 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

There are two major differences between the XTi and the XSi. The first is the resolution, but the difference is not substantial. The other is the 'Live View' in the XSi. This can come in handy, but quickly drains the battery.

If you don't think you'll use the 'Live View', the increased resolution probably isn't worth the additional cost, and if you do, you should probably be prepared to get extra batteries (and maybe an extra charger) if you plan tobe out shooting for an extended period.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 2:07 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 31
Default

Good input . . . I'll have to think about it. I used the LCD instead ofthe eye-piece with my super-zoom . . . . so the live view was appealing . . . but If the end photo quality wouldn't be that different, I might be better served in spending an extra 150 towards a lens
margstamps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2008, 3:07 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I would strongly suggest looking at a Canon 30D (40D if money were no object) over XTi or XSi as you will have a higher frame rate, but more importantly you will have ISO 3200 which in the gyms most of us shoot in will likely prove invaluable. Also live view is of no use when shooting sports as fast AF is essential and also you will be able to track much better than holding it at arms length.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"The lens of choice for a lot shooting Canon is the 85mm f1.8 however if you are going to be further out then you will be better with the 100mm f2 or the 135mm f2 (quite a lot more expensive).

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"For the football are you shooting in the day or under the lights?
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2008, 6:28 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 31
Default

Thanks for the info. . . I'll definitely check out the Canon is the 85mm f1.8. and the Canon 30D . . . I'm glad that I'm taking the time to do the research and that a forum like this is available. Thanks for your time.

My son, is playing college ball now, so his games are in the afternoon.
margstamps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2008, 6:32 AM   #9
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

If it is good light outside then you can get away with one of the 70-300mm lenses, they will not give the best quality or have the fastest AF but if you are topping your budget out on other areas these will let you shoot. The better option would be the Canon 70-300mm IS (not 75-300) or realistically the Sigma 100-300mm f4 or getting an f2.8 lens but we start getting expensive. One of the fave lenses for outdoor sports is the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 but it's not cheap but the results rock!
Mark1616 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 11:40 AM.