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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 15, 2009, 7:08 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Default How do these stack up against each other d3000 - xsi or Pentax k-x

I'm looking to buy my first DSLR and can't decide between the Canon xsi, Nikon d3000 and the Pentax K-X.
I plan on using the camera to take pics of the kids playing ball, and just general pics of the family. I like the speed of the Pentax and I also like that it has antishake in the camera body. Of course I may never by another lens so that may not be a factor. I also like the 11 point focus on the Pentax and Nikon. The video capability doesn't matter to me nor does the 12 mp of the Pentax and Canon. I've been told that the Canon takes the best pictures. Most people say go with the Nikon or Pentax but I would like to get the opinions of some of you guys. Thanks
gman1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 15, 2009, 7:23 PM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

All are great cameras. But I'm curious - you say "Of course I may never by another lens" - if that's the case, why are you wanting to buy a DSLR? This is a serious question. What is it you expect a DSLR with only a kit lens to produce that a digicam or superzoom cannot?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2009, 7:26 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Default

I need something a little better at capturing the action shots of the kids playing baseball and football. I will probably need a zoom lens in the future but for now I'm hoping the kit lens will work. I guess I could get the d3000 since it is cheapest and get an extra lens for about the same price as the pentax.
gman1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2009, 7:32 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

One possible advantage for the Pentax camera is the ability to use any Pentax ever made, while the Nikon d3000 doesn't have an auto focus motor in it so you lose AF function with many of Nikon's current lens line-up. Also, if you want stabilization you'd have to buy more expensive and somewhat heavier lenses than you would with the Pentax. On the other hand, the Nikon's flash system is better than either the Canon or the Pentax. High ISO pictures look really good on the K-x.

In the long run, all 3 cameras take good pictures.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2009, 7:39 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
One possible advantage for the Pentax camera is the ability to use any Pentax ever made, while the Nikon d3000 doesn't have an auto focus motor in it so you lose AF function with many of Nikon's current lens line-up. Also, if you want stabilization you'd have to buy more expensive and somewhat heavier lenses than you would with the Pentax. On the other hand, the Nikon's flash system is better than either the Canon or the Pentax. High ISO pictures look really good on the K-x.

In the long run, all 3 cameras take good pictures.
Yeah, That's the problem I'm having. I think they are all good cameras, I'm just not sure what is best for me. Does the Canon have any advantages over the others?
gman1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2009, 8:00 PM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

The Canon has the best AF system of the 3. If, as you state, sports is a major reason for buying the camera then the Canon is the best body for the job of the 3 cameras you mentioned. But none of them will do very good for football and baseball with just a kit lens. What kind of lens depends on the level of play, whether games are day or night and where you'll be shooting from. Taking tee-ball photos is fairly simple, taking HS baseball photos from outside the fence requires much longer focal length lenses.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2009, 9:11 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
The Canon has the best AF system of the 3. If, as you state, sports is a major reason for buying the camera then the Canon is the best body for the job of the 3 cameras you mentioned. But none of them will do very good for football and baseball with just a kit lens. What kind of lens depends on the level of play, whether games are day or night and where you'll be shooting from. Taking tee-ball photos is fairly simple, taking HS baseball photos from outside the fence requires much longer focal length lenses.
Good stuff now were getting somewhere. I'll be taking pics of 10u softball and t-ball. Eventually little league football. Sometimes you can find these camera with an additional zoom lens. Would these do for my purpose? So with these kinds of pics you think the canon is the one? Is 3 fps fast enough? I know the pentax does 4.7 fps. Would there be a big difference between a camera with 11 focal points and 9 focal points?
gman1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2009, 12:25 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
WCKSer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,857
Default

All 3 cameras are good good ones and are in the same class as an entry level DSLR. I have been looking for one for some times and finally decided on the Canon XSi with the 2 lens combo deal from amazon.com. It comes with the 18-55mm and 55-250mm kit lens for $633 shipped. This is the best price I have seen. Perhaps the price will even be lower on Black Friday. I actually like the Olympus E520 with 2 lens as well at $549 shipped. I decided not to get it because it uses xD and compact flash memory. I prefer to have a camera that uses SD cards which I have a few in possession. I should be getting the shipment in next week....I can't wait!
WCKSer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2009, 7:46 AM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gman1987 View Post
Good stuff now were getting somewhere. I'll be taking pics of 10u softball and t-ball. Eventually little league football. Sometimes you can find these camera with an additional zoom lens. Would these do for my purpose? So with these kinds of pics you think the canon is the one? Is 3 fps fast enough? I know the pentax does 4.7 fps. Would there be a big difference between a camera with 11 focal points and 9 focal points?
One of the critical components of sports shooting that you won't see mentioned in camera specs or in most reviews is the ability to track a moving subject. Both the camera body and lens play a part in this. But, for your purposes let's stick with the part the body plays. When tracking a moving subject, the camera body does two things: first it continuously re-focuses. Second and just as important it calculates how fast your subject is moving and anticipates where the subject will be so it can 'cheat' that re-focus. That's called "predictive focus". Of the 3 cameras, the XSi does the best at this. As to focus points, when shooting the sports you're planning on shooting it is highly advisable to use a single focus point. So number of points (at least at this level of camera) is not so relevant. Now, # of points can be very beneficial for other types of shooting. But I can't say whether a difference between 9 and 11 points is going to mean anything.

Now, as the other poster mentioned, you can often buy the Canon camera with the addition of the 55-250mm lens. It's a nice lens for what it is. In good light it will allow you to shoot the 3 sports you wish to shoot, PROVIDED YOU ARE CLOSE ENOUGH. Working limit will be about 30-35 yards. It's a consumer grade lens with a consumer grade price so it isn't perfectly suited to sports work but no 200mm+ lens at that price point will be. But combined with the XSi, if you're close enough it will get you better shots than you can get with any digicam on the market. And the combo should do better than any similar priced combo in Nikon or Pentax.

In other respects I think the other two cameras you're considering are somewhat better - but I think the XSi will be significantly better than the Pentax for sports and better than the Nikon as well.

Now - I'll also throw out this warning - sports shooting is NOT a point-and-shoot type of photography. It takes quite a bit of practice and it requires you to learn some of the fundamentals of photography. Some people buy a DSLR expecting it to be a magic point-and-shoot for sports - expecting their photos will miraculously look great. Unfortunately that's not the case. It isn't rocket science to be sure but you're going to have to be willing to venture out of the automatic modes of the camera if you're going to get good results.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2009, 9:25 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
One of the critical components of sports shooting that you won't see mentioned in camera specs or in most reviews is the ability to track a moving subject. Both the camera body and lens play a part in this. But, for your purposes let's stick with the part the body plays. When tracking a moving subject, the camera body does two things: first it continuously re-focuses. Second and just as important it calculates how fast your subject is moving and anticipates where the subject will be so it can 'cheat' that re-focus. That's called "predictive focus". Of the 3 cameras, the XSi does the best at this. As to focus points, when shooting the sports you're planning on shooting it is highly advisable to use a single focus point. So number of points (at least at this level of camera) is not so relevant. Now, # of points can be very beneficial for other types of shooting. But I can't say whether a difference between 9 and 11 points is going to mean anything.

Now, as the other poster mentioned, you can often buy the Canon camera with the addition of the 55-250mm lens. It's a nice lens for what it is. In good light it will allow you to shoot the 3 sports you wish to shoot, PROVIDED YOU ARE CLOSE ENOUGH. Working limit will be about 30-35 yards. It's a consumer grade lens with a consumer grade price so it isn't perfectly suited to sports work but no 200mm+ lens at that price point will be. But combined with the XSi, if you're close enough it will get you better shots than you can get with any digicam on the market. And the combo should do better than any similar priced combo in Nikon or Pentax.

In other respects I think the other two cameras you're considering are somewhat better - but I think the XSi will be significantly better than the Pentax for sports and better than the Nikon as well.

Now - I'll also throw out this warning - sports shooting is NOT a point-and-shoot type of photography. It takes quite a bit of practice and it requires you to learn some of the fundamentals of photography. Some people buy a DSLR expecting it to be a magic point-and-shoot for sports - expecting their photos will miraculously look great. Unfortunately that's not the case. It isn't rocket science to be sure but you're going to have to be willing to venture out of the automatic modes of the camera if you're going to get good results.
Thanks, This is the kind of answer I've been hoping for. Obviously I'll be using it for all types of things like family vactions and pictures as well but it sonds like even though the others may be a little better at this over all the canon is the right one for me.
gman1987 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 8:15 PM.