Continuous action camera for XC ski photos?

NordicSkiRacer

After I cross the finish line, I grab my digital camera and head back out on the cross country ski trail to get photos of other racers for my web site NordicSkiRacer.com, uploading them to SmugMug because everyone likes to see their self.

I take continuous action pictures because the racers are moving fast; arms and leg are flailing and I can't always plan for one snap. There are trains of skiers going by and I need to capture each skier.

In the summer, I photograph rollerskiers, running dogs, bikers, runners, etc. 99.9% of my photos are action shots taken in continuous mode.

I'm looking for a small, light, easy to carry (i.e., not a DSLR) camera for the job that powers up quickly, and stores my "sport" settings so I can start clicking as someone comes unexpectedly around the corner.

My current cameras (a Sony and a Cannon) have OK burst speed but suffer from the fatal flaw that each picture taken causes the LCD and viewfinder to "freeze frame" for an instant before the next picture is taken. It's nearly impossible to follow the action. Having a continuous view is a must.

3x zoom is OK, but 10x is better. 3fps is OK but faster is better. Viewfinder required (ever try using an LCD in bright sunlight in the snow?)

Any recommendations? Thanks! - Mike

kini62

AFAIK all the non DSLR cameras have the freezing LCD issue during continuous shooting. The best thing to do is get one that takes the best video (1080P) and pull frames out it for stills. The problem with that though is that they are of course fairly low res and with P&S models you don't have much if any control over SS.

Gene

Qarik

that's tough one without an slr. What is your budget? I know my lumix lx3 can shoot 2.5fps without the wait but only 3x zoom. canon G10 has better zoom but 1.3 fps I beleive.

The new lumix GF1 is a hybrid..not quite slr but you can change lenses. This has 3fps and whatever zoom you want up to 150mm. It is considerably more expensive.

Unfortunately none of them have a viewfinder.

I am afraid if a view finder is a must then i don't know of anythign short of DSLR that going meet you requirements. Note that a view finder almost always is going to mean an DSLR. They don't put viewfinders on modern non-digital cameras anymore.

Ziggy will probably have an idea though

ziggy53

Qarik wrote:

... Ziggy will probably have an idea though

Unfortunately this is a true "sports" activity, and I doubt that any non-dSLR will yield enough keepers to be worthwhile.

My first suggestion is a true sports capable dSLR, and that means a pretty high-end Canon or Nikon with sports lenses as well. You could probably get a keeper rate of around 60-70 percent with good technique. Anything less will yield progressively less sharp images, although special technique can help.

Pre-focus on a spot and then let the subject pass that spot and you can cut AF times out of the equation. View "over" an electronic viewfinder (sight like you would a rifle) and the LCD display lag is out of the equation. Now you are left with shutter lag, and that you might be able to anticipate some of the time.

I shot this way for a full football season and, it's no fun. I did get some keepers and I was thankful for what I got.

It took a couple of years to save up for a used Canon 1D MKII and EF 70-200mm, f2.8L USM, but once I hit that combination and learned how to use the AF system, my keeper rate took off and I was getting 10 times the quantity of usable images, and I was able to shoot in less light too.

For cold weather sports I do recommend a camera that uses a lithium technology battery. (The 1D MKII/MKIIN use NiMH technology which is not very good at low temperatures.)

One of the better Olympus or Pentax dSLRs with sports lenses might be a fairly good compromise between size/weight and AF speed. The best lenses are still going to be pretty heavy.

Toshido

While still pales A LOT in comparison to a DSLR the Canon powershot S series does pretty much what you are asking for.

I have both the S1 and S3 cameras, the S1 will be around my house for a very long time because i bought a really good underwater kit for it.

The Powershot S5 IS, is 8 mpixel, continuous shooting of 1.5 fps and has an electronic viewfinder (at least the 1 and 3 does) the S3 is pretty close to the same except it also has a high speed continous shooting mode which does about 2.3 fps.

Again very sad when compared to a DSLR....


The biggest issue, and the largest reason I upgraded, is focus speed. Using the S1 was just painful last summer at the waterpark. Still with a little post process work and throwing out ALOT of pictures I got some pretty decent shots. Keep mind I was out on a sunny day with relatively slow subjects.

With a little looking you can find a P&S or prosumer camera out there that does what you want, but no where near as well as a DSLR.

Zerodog

I had an S3 as my camera before I got my D90. It is an awesome all arounder with a ton of zoom. It was a great camera to learn with too. I can only imagine an S5 being better. I got some very good action shots with the S3 though. A lot is practice and technique. But.........the D90 kicks that things ass in every way shape and form except size and weight. Images are sharper, brighter and better color with the D90. It is easier to track a moving object and you get more frames in focus on a continuous burst. And in low light. Like a cloudy day. Forget it. The SLR wins hands down. There is no comparison to what that bigger sensor will get you.

Here is a few S3 shots for you to ponder. These are a lot faster than skiers too. And S3 or S5 etc could be a great way to step up your game.

NordicSkiRacer

All great suggestions. The optical viewfinder requirement comes from my experience of digital viewfinders lagging behind the action. If there was a digital viewfinder that was kept up, that would be fine!