Advice - Nikon body upgrade??

Guido5

Need some expert advice on upgrading a camera body (Nikon). Currently, I have a D80. I have three daughters very active and usually am the team pic dad and have been approached my some parents to zero in on their kid for shots...soccer, lacrosse, swimming, gymnastics, volleyball. Outside sports usually don't give me a problem, but the indoor stuff is challenging. I open my lense up and crank up the iso to adjust for poor lighting and get a lot of noise. Have a 80-200, 2.8 I usually use indoor. This is a wish/Christmas list type of thing...without breaking the bank. Looking for possible improvements in pic quality, less noise, speed - D200, D300, D700, D90, D3???

Thanks in advance.

PixNW

If sports are going to be a big part of the equation and you plan to stay with Nikon, you'd certainly be happy with the D3. For indoors, if you can use a flash that would help. Barring that, consider getting something like a faster prime for indoors.

If the D3 blows your budget too much, look for a good used D2XS or something similar.

Onrey

I have a buddy who has the D300, I have shot next to him at Highschool football, terrible lighting, I have the Canon MkIIn and his D300 takes amazing photo's at ISO 5400 with very and I mean VERY little noise. Not like the old Nikons, My quess would be the D700 would be the same if not even better concearning noise.

donek

The D700 is the best budget choice for indoor sports and the glass you have. It's $3000. The D300 is one step down as far as noise is concerned, but the crop factor will make basketball and Volleyball tough with that lens. It's the same crop factor as your D80.

For indoor sports, I'd really suggest 2 or 3 good flashes and remote triggers. I use SB-800s and have had great luck with the cactus triggers in a gym. I'd avoid the cheaper flashes as they don't recycle as fast. 2 remote flashes positioned properly will allow to shoot down at ISO 400 f2.8 to f4 in most gyms. You can increase ISO and use some of your less expensive slower glass as well.

Glass is a great investment. I started with a 50 f1.4 and added an 85 f1.4 and 30 f1.4. These were great options, but the small depth of field is very limiting. These lenses are great options for indoor shooting without flash in a lot of other situations.

I prefer the sports images I get with my full frame D700 70-200 f2.8 and off camera flashes. I frequently shoot at f4 getting sharp focus on my subject, but still throwing the BG out of focus.

Guido5

donek wrote:

The D700 is the best budget choice for indoor sports and the glass you have. It's $3000. The D300 is one step down as far as noise is concerned, but the crop factor will make basketball and Volleyball tough with that lens. It's the same crop factor as your D80.

For indoor sports, I'd really suggest 2 or 3 good flashes and remote triggers. I use SB-800s and have had great luck with the cactus triggers in a gym. I'd avoid the cheaper flashes as they don't recycle as fast. 2 remote flashes positioned properly will allow to shoot down at ISO 400 f2.8 to f4 in most gyms. You can increase ISO and use some of your less expensive slower glass as well.

Glass is a great investment. I started with a 50 f1.4 and added an 85 f1.4 and 30 f1.4. These were great options, but the small depth of field is very limiting. These lenses are great options for indoor shooting without flash in a lot of other situations.

I prefer the sports images I get with my full frame D700 70-200 f2.8 and off camera flashes. I frequently shoot at f4 getting sharp focus on my subject, but still throwing the BG out of focus.

Great insight everyone...

Sooo, if I'm going to stay linked to sports photography, it sounds like the D700 or D3 is the way to go to get to the next level. Is the D3 really worth the extra $1K though?

What is the range/distance to the subject of the 85 1.4 with its small depth of field?

Guess this will be Christmas/birthday/anniversary/etc...

Greyhound Rick

Ive shot with both my D300 and my friend's D3 at Phoenix Greyhound Park and Ive also used my 70-200 f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4 and my friend's 400 f/2.8

IMO, the 85 is great because it allows for much needed light (no flash allowed and spotty lighting at the greyhound races), but the smaller DOF is a challenge once you get below 2.0. However, the 85 is not a sports lens (S type) and does not track as well as the 70-200. The 70-200 is great, but cant shut down more than 2.8 which has limitations with the D300 as noise really creeps in in low lighting at ISOs over 1250 especially when you are battling shadows and dark spots.

When I used my friend's D3 I was absolutely blown away with the difference in ISO capabilities. The D3 changed everything. The D3 at ISO 3500 was the same as my D300 at ISO 1000. The D3 also tracked better and provided more shots in focus.

My advice is to either get the D3 and open up your lens possiblilities because you'll have no problem most of the time with f/2.8 OR to get the D700 which also has great ISO performance. If youre looking for faster tracking while focusing and thats a big part of your criteria Id go for the D3. If you feel that that particular feature isnt mandatory Id go with the D700.

Hope this helps. Ive shot about 15,000 photos at Phoenix Greyhound Park and thats the conclusion Ive come to at this point.

My best. Let us know how you do!!

take care,

Rick

jbr13

IF you can't afford the D3 at $5000 dollars, or the D700, or D300, I have got some very nice results from my D90 at high ISO's at night time football.

For $1000 dollars it is a great camera! I shot these with the 80-200 F2.8



http://jbr.smugmug.com/gallery/6429213_uXNGZ#407290598_h3Pfm

MikeMcA²

For indoor sports, if the D3 or D700 are manageable, they cannot currently be beat. I shoot with the D3 and D300, and there is frankly no comparison between the two in the ISO department. While the D300 blows away the D2X by at least one stop, probably 1.5 stops, the D3 is on another planet with not only noise, but image quality at those indoor and early-morning/dusk/night ISOs. If I didn't need the fast frame rate and already have the D3, I would be more than happy with the D700 and MB-D10 grip.

Matt336

I have a D200 right now and plan on stepping up to a D700 or D3 sometime while keeping the 200 as a backup. I'm not sure how much of a step up the D200 is over the D80 though.

ian408

I've moved this over to Cameras so others will see it.

NoahDL88

I've just had first hand experience with the low light gremlins, my buddy and i were standing at the finish line of the Baja 1000 at 4:30am, I have a D200 and he's running a Canon 40d. I was very impressed at the higher quality at high iso that his Canon was able to shoot, his pictures were phenomenal, where as the D200 was mediocre at best. Time for me to upgrade

Harryb

I shoot with the D3 and the D300. For lowlight shooting there is no comaprison between the two. The D3 is significantly better for lowlight captures.

For indoor shooting I would go with the D3 or the D700.

Cygnus Studios

Guido5 wrote:

Is the D3 really worth the extra $1K though?

If you can afford it, there really is no comparision. While the D700 is somewhat close, and the D300 is a few steps down.

Any of the above will be a major upgrade from the D80, D70, and D50 lineups.

For low light and indoors, you would be blown away with the high ISO settings. I constantly shoot at 6400 and noise is not an issue.

Shane422

I have recently picked up the D90, I also have a buddy with a D80 and D700. So I have shot quite a bit with all three. The D90 is a great upgrade to the D80, but really only gives your a clean ISO1600. ISO3200 is usable but not great. That said, the D700 was amazing up to ISO6400. Had I had an extra $1700, the D700 would have been mine. But unless you need a camera now, wait to see what the Nikon news is now through the end on January. I would expect to see some more great things coming very soon.

ian408

I think you're looking at early March for any product announcement (PMA in Las Vegas).

The D3 is great in low light. But if you don't need all the bells and whistles, the D700 would be your next best low light Nikon body--it's effectively the same as the D3 in low light.

kygarden

I need a 'body upgrade', but....that's more of a personal issue...

Seriously though, if you have the money go for at least the D700. I can say for me, in every way it's worth every penny I paid for it.

Nubster

If you don't mind waiting and you don't mind buying used, wait until after December 1 to see what the big announcement is from Nikon. Speculation has it that they are going to announce the D3X which will do two things, lower the price on new D3's and you'll see a lot of used D3's hit the market at decent prices. Just a thought.