DSLR for Sports/Action

kerstenp

Hi,
I've been playing with cameras most of my life, and now I'm ready to take the plunge and get a DSLR. My current digital cam is the Canon G5, which I love, but it's time to move up.
I would like your opinions on which DSLR would suit me better for outdoor sports/motorsports/action photography. I'm considering the D80 and 30D as top contenders, leaving me enough $$$ to get a decent lens and keep me under $2000.
I am leaning towards the Canon, since I already have a Speedlight 400ex flash.
Thanks in advance,
Kersten

aktse

kerstenp wrote:

Hi,
I've been playing with cameras most of my life, and now I'm ready to take the plunge and get a DSLR. My current digital cam is the Canon G5, which I love, but it's time to move up.
I would like your opinions on which DSLR would suit me better for outdoor sports/motorsports/action photography. I'm considering the D80 and 30D as top contenders, leaving me enough $$$ to get a decent lens and keep me under $2000.
I am leaning towards the Canon, since I already have a Speedlight 400ex flash.
Thanks in advance,
Kersten

I think most DSLR would work for you and you should choose something that woudl feel good in your hands.

My suggestion: get a 20D, or 350D, or D50... maybe something used (some being sold on dgrin right now!) and spend the rest of the money on a good lens. What sports are you trying to shoot? What time of day?

UT Scott

between the 30D and the D80 I'd say go for the 30D. It has a faster frames per second rate that would be handy in sports. I've only used a 30D once and I did like it, but I prefer the feel of Nikon cameras. If you haven't already, get to a camera shop and give each of them a test run, see what you like best.

kerstenp

aktse wrote:

I think most DSLR would work for you and you should choose something that woudl feel good in your hands.

My suggestion: get a 20D, or 350D, or D50... maybe something used (some being sold on dgrin right now!) and spend the rest of the money on a good lens. What sports are you trying to shoot? What time of day?

I'm trying to improve my shots of Motoross, desert truck racing, mountain biking, skateboarding, and BMX. I also take photos of my kids playing league sports like football and soccer. Other parents ask for copies of photos, which I don't mind sharing, but most of the pictures look grainy or noisy from shooting with too high of an ISO.
I'm real picky about the quality of prints I give the other parents, as it is a reflection of my work, so grainy prints don't cut it.
My goal is to eventualy do motorsports photography as a possible business venture. (Big Dreams, eh?)
Kersten

System

Look for 5fps RAW ability. The 30d fits this bill. It was one of the few upgrades canon made to the 20d.

SteveM

truth wrote:

Look for 5fps RAW ability. The 30d fits this bill. It was one of the few upgrades canon made to the 20d.

Also if you're worried about grain and noise, there is absolutely nothing better in that category (maybe any) than the Canon 20/30D. They're known for their super low noise even at ISO1600-3200. I've had a 20D for quite a while, shot 10k photos and haven't been disappointed for a second. The entry level Nikons aren't even in the same league.

gpphotos

you can get great sports shots with just about any DSLR body. whats going to make the biggest difference is the glass you get to go with it.

beware of the temptation to buy a camera based on how it shoots at high ISO. 90% of the time i shoot at 200 ISO even in low light, because i have some decent (but not great) glass, and i am generally happy with the results. Buy a camera body based on how it feels to you. the nikons are generally a bit heavier by a few ounces than their canon counterparts, which i prefer. the entry level canon rebels all felt too lightweight in my hands. also you can buy any nikon lens dated back from about 1955 and it will work on any of the nikon DSLR's.

nikon has a slight edge over canon in that their lighting systems are generally thought to be a touch better (although i have not used the canon system myself to compare)

claudermilk

truth wrote:

Look for 5fps RAW ability. The 30d fits this bill. It was one of the few upgrades canon made to the 20d.

Um, actually that's one of the things that's exactly the same between them. The main things the 30D got was true 3.5 degree spot metering, a deeper buffer, and RGB histogram; there's a few other things like a bunch of extra P&S modes and that oh-so-useful Print button. Not enough for me to retire the 20D.

Anyway, the 20D or 30D are probably the best out there for fast action and low light. But, none of the bodies will perform well unless you have good, fast glass on them. That means primes, or spendy f2.8 zooms.

ziggy53

gpphotos wrote:

...

beware of the temptation to buy a camera based on how it shoots at high ISO. ...

While I might agree with you about daytime sports, night is an altogether different matter. Night sports require hi-ISO to stop action. There is no alternative.

I just shot a HS Football game last night at ISO 3200 and f2.8. I was lucky to get 1/125th in the end zones. I still have some motion blur, so I could have used an f2 lens.

Take a look in the "Sports" forum here at DGrin. Most of the night stuff is done with fast lenses and hi-ISO.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DaQO

This nice fellow posts his settings:

http://www.toulme.net/sports/druidhills/football/092206_southside/index.htm

ziggy53

gpphotos

kerstenp wrote:

I'm trying to improve my shots of Motoross, desert truck racing, mountain biking, skateboarding, and BMX. I also take photos of my kids playing league sports like football and soccer.
Kersten

yea, not too many night sports in there unless we're talking highschool football...although most stadiums are well lit.

System

claudermilk wrote:

The main things the 30D... a deeper buffer,

Without the buffer the 20d is esentially shooting 3fps RAW unless you only use one small burst with long gaps between. As the buffer fills the fps drops. But I digress...I wouldn't trade in a 20d for a 30d either. The 30d was there when I was ready to buy so I opted for it. I could not justify buying a 20d when the 30d was available.

Poseidon

For Sports/Action photography the 1 series is really the way to go! I know it is WAY more money, but the Auto focus is so much faster! You will really appreciate the difference, trust me! It is MUCH harder to find the KEEPERS when almost EVERY PICTURE is in focus!

Jeffro

I would stay with Canon, since you have a Canon Speedlight already.

I have the 20D and shoot MX with it, and have great success. I use the 70-200L F2.8 most of the time. I do dream of having a 1D Mark II N.

I don't use RAW for event photography. I stick with jpeg, since it affords me less time at the PC.

kerstenp

Thanks to all for your suggestions, looks like I'm on the hunt for a 20d or 30d.
I was at a Vorra truck race today, and saw the event photographer was using a 20d. After seeing his photos online, I know what kind of images to expect.

MTN-Freerider

Buying a dSLR for action can be a tricky proposition. I used to have a Nikon D50 that I tried to use for extreme mountain biking. Although the image quality was incredible, the auto-focus just couldn't zero in on a moving target.

Your entry level DSLRs like the D50, D70, Rebel XT, etc just don't have the same capabilities as a Prefesional dSLR.


After hours of research I ended up figuring that for my budget, the solution was to buy a Nikon D1. Yes, the 2.7mp Dinosaur from 1999. The resolution might be low (still enough for a good 8x10) but the auto-focus is light lightning, and I don't even mean a small difference. With my D50 shooting the action was almost imposible, the shutter wouldn't fire because It couldn't keep the moving subject in focus. The D1 snaps right in and tracks the subject as it moves, shutter fires every time, exactly when I press it. Also 4.5 fps and a 21 shot image buffer ain't too shabby.

Now I'm not recomending you buy a D1. Not unless you like the idea of memorizing the numerical codes, and sub-codes for over thirty different custom settings (menu, what menu?) and having noise that bands together like the static on a TV with bad reception.

All I'm saying is before you try and buy your camera do your research and find out EXACTLY what you want to do with your camera.

P.S. From what you said, as long as you're not trying to make poster-sized prints, check out the Nikon D2h or Canon 1d.

SpeshulEd

Did you by chance try a faster lens on the D50, I think the slow focusing problem might have to do with the lens, as opposed to the camera itself.

MTN-Freerider wrote:

Buying a dSLR for action can be a tricky proposition. I used to have a Nikon D50 that I tried to use for extreme mountain biking. Although the image quality was incredible, the auto-focus just couldn't zero in on a moving target.

Your entry level DSLRs like the D50, D70, Rebel XT, etc just don't have the same capabilities as a Prefesional dSLR.


After hours of research I ended up figuring that for my budget, the solution was to buy a Nikon D1. Yes, the 2.7mp Dinosaur from 1999. The resolution might be low (still enough for a good 8x10) but the auto-focus is light lightning, and I don't even mean a small difference. With my D50 shooting the action was almost imposible, the shutter wouldn't fire because It couldn't keep the moving subject in focus. The D1 snaps right in and tracks the subject as it moves, shutter fires every time, exactly when I press it. Also 4.5 fps and a 21 shot image buffer ain't too shabby.

Now I'm not recomending you buy a D1. Not unless you like the idea of memorizing the numerical codes, and sub-codes for over thirty different custom settings (menu, what menu?) and having noise that bands together like the static on a TV with bad reception.

All I'm saying is before you try and buy your camera do your research and find out EXACTLY what you want to do with your camera.

P.S. From what you said, as long as you're not trying to make poster-sized prints, check out the Nikon D2h or Canon 1d.

claudermilk

It's a combination. A slow lens & slow AF motor won't help much (though, doesn't Nikon still do the AF motor in the body?) A top-end body will have a more capable AF sensor--that's one of the the things you're paying for.

Steve Cavigliano

2 questions for you. How serious are you about this? How far do you think you will go with it?

If you are very serious and if you think you will want to move to the next step (body-wise). You choice today should keep that in mind. IOW, as someone mentioned, much of your image quality will depend on your glass. Since sports need fast glass and long glass. The prices for this type glass are high. Once you accumulate $5000 in lenses, you really won't want to change body mfgrs.

My advice is to figure out the answers to the 2 questions and keep those answers in mind when making your decision. If you see a 1D MkII N in your future, look at the 20D/30D. If you see a D2X in your future, strongly consider the D80

Steve