YACT: Need help choosing a DSLR and lenses

[SithSolo1]

I've had a Canon S2 IS for about a year now and it has been good to me. Last weekend though I went to the american le mas series race at Road Atlanta and the S2 just couldn't cut it. By the time I took a shot of one car 3 others had gone by, focusing took too long so a lot of my shots were out of focus, and night shots were abismal. So I've decided to drop some cash on a DSLR. My budget is $900-1200 and I have no problem buying used equipment. My main focus is getting something for fast actions shots(cars) and then the ocational wildlife photos(animals and insects).

 

[rudder]

Pentax K10D

Never owned one, but its is coming out soon (or out already). What makes it nice in my eyes is the in body image stabilization. I have a canon now and you will pay a premium to get image stabilization as its in the lens. Not sure how the performance differs, but it seems like the Pentax would save money that way.

 

[yllus]

The ideal body and lens while maintaining a decent bang for your buck:

- Canon EOS 30D body ($1,169.95)
- Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM Lens ($889.00)

You could step down to:

- Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT (a.k.a. 350D) ($622.95)
- Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Lens ($584.95)

 

[SithSolo1]

thanks for the suggestions

I'll keep an eye on the Pentax, it looks interesting.

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: yllus
The ideal body and lens while maintaining a decent bang for your buck:

- Canon EOS 30D body ($1,169.95)
- Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM Lens ($889.00)

You could step down to:

- Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT (a.k.a. 350D) ($622.95)
- Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Lens ($584.95)

Canon's double rebate offer is on the way. If you go with the 30D and 70-200/4 L, you'll save $270.

$1200 for fast focusing equipment is tough. I've seen used D2h's go for about $1050 which is about as fast as you're going to get for a body, but that doesn't leave much room for lenses.

Then again you could always try to get by without fast focusing motors and all . . .

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Used Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM: $500
Canon EOS XTi (same accurate focusing as 20D): $775
2GB Sandisk Ultra II CF Card: $70
Battery Grip for the XTi: $70
Extra Battery: $10

Or you can get a used 20D for around $1000 and get a faster FPS (XTi is 3fps, 20D is 5fps).

Anything faster than this in the Canon camp and you're looking at a $2000-$2500 used 1DMKII body.

 

[rivan]

Here's another vote for the Canon system. The biggest thing that keeps me in with Canon is the lens system; excellent lenses both from Canon and other brands at every price point - Nikon has the same situation, but Canon's cameras are (and have been) superior in my opinion. The little preference I had for Canon over Nikon pre-digital has really solidified with Canon's track record of good to excellent dSLRs.

My consideration revolves around long term ownership, and knowing I'd be spending a fair amount on glass; I've got a few thousand wrapped up in lenses and paid $1k for my drebel when it was new. I'll be able to step up to a better camera whenever I'm ready, and will already be set for lenses.

Depending on your shooting habits (are you the click-like-crazy-and-delete-later type? do you spend a full day out?) I'd say Fuzzy's recommendations are quite good.

 

[Triumph]

Regardless of which body you choose, the lens is most important, and for sports photography, the most important things are long zoom and fast aperture. The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is a perfect choice, they probably have that lens for either Canon or Nikon mounts. Pentax, Olympus, etc. probably have similar lenses, but that's where you should focus. I don't believe a 30D is going to get you that much better imagery than the XT or XTi, at least not for a beginner.

The new Pentax K10D looks very good. In camera stabilization (Canon only has in-lens stabilization) means you'll get stable pictures at lower shutter speeds regardless of what lens you are using. This doesn't help for sports photography where the subjects are moving, but it would help for nature photography, reducing the need for a tripod. It also has a good sized buffer, giving you unlimited 3 fps in JPEG mode (versus XTi which is 3 fps up to 27? files?). And the hardened case provides some protection against the elements. I really like that camera.

 

[foghorn67]

Used Canon EOS 1D with a replaced shutter when you want the fastest AF in the world.

 

[randomlinh]

the 70-200 f/4L is an awesome lightweight telephoto.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Pretty much anything is going to be fast enough for you, I've shot motor racing with a manual focus film SLR, the trick is simply to find a spot where you have a good angle for cars coming together (I particularly like areas where a hairpin turn opens to a long straight, you get great shots of cars bunched up coming out of the corner) and lock in your focus and metering settings. All that's left then is to push the shutter release.

Any SLR will focus faster than the S3IS, but I'll agree that Canon has the fastest available.

That said, here's what I've ordered for my step into DSLRs: Sony A100 (body only: $799 from Adorama) and the Tamron 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical and 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD lenses ($220 as a package together). It's not going to match the $500+ lenses that have been mentioned here, but I'm willing to bet that it would still be more than fast enough for your needs.

Of course, there's nothing at all wrong with the Canon kit either, go try both and see what you like. In the end, the "best" camera is always the one that you like. The best specs in the world are useless if you never want to use the camera, and I've seen some incredible shots taken with a plastic Holga.

Try shooting all manual focus a few times too, it gives an interesting perspective on taking pictures. I know that when I went from a nice AF point and shoot (film) to my SLR system, I found that the "loss" of AF really made me think a lot more about the shot before I took it, and I like to think that has helped me take better pictures. (Of course, better than crap is sometimes still crap. )

ZV

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

If you're doing fast-moving objects two of the things that you need to look for is a body with a quick and accurate continuous autofocus servo and a lens with quick focusing. Lenses with Sigma's HSM, Canon's USM, and Nikon's SWM will be fast enough to track objects. Lenses with traditional, slower motors may not. The camera itself also needs to have a fast, accurate autofocus servo for continually tracking objects. The Rebel XT's AF Servo is horrible. The XTi's and 20D/30D will be better. I have no idea about the Pentax K10D. This also depends on how many autofocus points are in the camera. Cheaper cameras may have 3, 5, 7, or 9 autofocus points scattered about the screen. If the part of the subject that you want in focus isn't covered by at least one of these autofocus points, the camera loses focus, so more points is better. On higher, $2000+ cameras you'll find that they have 40+ autofocus points throughout the viewfinder, so that it can always track the subject. Example

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
If you're doing fast-moving objects two of the things that you need to look for is a body with a quick and accurate continuous autofocus servo and a lens with quick focusing. Lenses with Sigma's HSM, Canon's USM, and Nikon's SWM will be fast enough to track objects. Lenses with traditional, slower motors may not. The camera itself also needs to have a fast, accurate autofocus servo for continually tracking objects. The Rebel XT's AF Servo is horrible. The XTi's may be better. I have no idea about the Pentax K10D. This also depends on how many autofocus points are in the camera. Cheaper cameras may have 3, 5, 7, or 9 autofocus points scattered about the screen. If the part of the subject that you want in focus isn't covered by at least one of these autofocus points, the camera loses focus, so more points is better. On higher, $2000+ cameras you'll find that they have 40+ autofocus points throughout the viewfinder, so that it can always track the subject. Example

Having went from the XT to the Xti to the 30D...I can tell you the XTi and the 30D share the same AF. And it is way better than the XT. I couldn't track birds in flight, now I can.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: Triumph
Regardless of which body you choose, the lens is most important, and for sports photography, the most important things are long zoom and fast aperture. The Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is a perfect choice, they probably have that lens for either Canon or Nikon mounts. Pentax, Olympus, etc. probably have similar lenses, but that's where you should focus. I don't believe a 30D is going to get you that much better imagery than the XT or XTi, at least not for a beginner.

The new Pentax K10D looks very good. In camera stabilization (Canon only has in-lens stabilization) means you'll get stable pictures at lower shutter speeds regardless of what lens you are using. This doesn't help for sports photography where the subjects are moving, but it would help for nature photography, reducing the need for a tripod. It also has a good sized buffer, giving you unlimited 3 fps in JPEG mode (versus XTi which is 3 fps up to 27? files?). And the hardened case provides some protection against the elements. I really like that camera.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to in camera stabilization for sporting events. If you ever get a fast 200mm or anything above 300mm, you are going to want at least a monopod if you are at the event more then an hour, it's a weight thing.
Also, in camera IS doesn't work hardly a squat at these focal lengths. Maybe half a stop. They were intended for the 'walk around' lenses.

 

[OutHouse]

nice thread. I have been looking hard at the Canon Rebel XTI. 10.1 mpixel. my bday is in a couple of weeks and i have been pouring on the extra love to my wife to get this camera.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Dangit.... I quoted myself. Sorry.

 

[SithSolo1]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Dangit.... I quoted myself. Sorry.

lol