|
|
 Up |
|
  |
Author: BearBear Date: Sep 2, 2008 15:39
So I'm looking through my holiday pics, and they're ... ok ... I could
blame myself for their slight crapness, but I'd much rather blame my
Fuji FinePix 9500, as that would absolve me of blame ... other decent
digital cameras I've tried seem so much easier to use for sports
photography, and the lens isn't interchangeable on this one either, so
what sort of money do I have to spend to get something good for
sports/motorsports photography?
I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
decent?
And then what lens? From experiments with my own kit, I was thinking
something zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent) - am I heading
in the right direction?
Help!
--
Bear
2002 Yamaha R1
Saab Aero Sport
|
| |
|
| | 159 Comments |
|
|
Author: Pikey JoePikey Joe Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:14
On 2 Sep, 14:39, Bear gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
> Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
> something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
> decent?
I'm thinking it's time to get another DSLR myself, and I've heard good
things about the Canon EOS 1000D. Price is pretty good too, £350-ish
for the body.
What say the FOAK?
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: ogdenogden Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:49
Bear wrote:
> I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
> Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
> something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
> decent?
>
> And then what lens? From experiments with my own kit, I was thinking
> something zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent) - am I heading
> in the right direction?
I've got a Nikon D40 and it's absolutely fine. They're peanuts to buy
now (250 quid or so), as they're last year's thing, but 500 quid for a
body alone will easily get you something semi-professional.
Lens-wise, I have the standard kit 18-55 zoom lens and a 55-200. I
picked up a 70-300 VR zoom a few months ago (all Nikon lenses) and it
seems absolutely fine. That's equivalent to 450mm on 35mm so probably
around the size you're looking for. Anything longer than that and
you're starting to talk serious money.
If only my ability was anywhere near as good as the camera.
|
| Show full article (1.04Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Big DaveBig Dave Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:50
On 2 Sep, 14:39, Bear gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking Nikon,
Good man.
Nikon is "The One True Way".
>
> And then what lens? zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent)
Multiply the focal length of a "digital lens" by 1.4 or 1.5 for the
equivalent 35mm focal length.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:50
On 2 Sep, 14:39, Bear gmail.com> wrote:> So I'm looking through my holiday pics, and they're ... ok ... I could
> blame myself for their slight crapness, but I'd much rather blame my
> Fuji FinePix 9500, as that would absolve me of blame ... other decent
> digital cameras I've tried seem so much easier to use for sports
> photography, and the lens isn't interchangeable on this one either, so
> what sort of money do I have to spend to get something good for
> sports/motorsports photography?
>
> I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
> Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
> something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
> decent?
>
> And then what lens? From experiments with my own kit, I was thinking
> something zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent) - am I heading
> in the right direction?
>
First off, bodies. I'm a Nikon man; others are Canon fiends. Horses
for courses. ...
|
| Show full article (2.15Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: NigeNige Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:51
"Bear" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2327525253b184e398a1c3@news.individual.de...
So I'm looking through my holiday pics, and they're ... ok ... I could
blame myself for their slight crapness, but I'd much rather blame my
Fuji FinePix 9500, as that would absolve me of blame ... other decent
digital cameras I've tried seem so much easier to use for sports
photography, and the lens isn't interchangeable on this one either, so
what sort of money do I have to spend to get something good for
sports/motorsports photography?
I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
something else ... is
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:55
>If only my ability was anywhere near as good as the >camera.
Ditto
--
Vass
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Sep 2, 2008 16:57
>"TOG@Toil" yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:4edcf1f8-c843-435e-a2ac-4e9874029500@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>On 2 Sep, 14:39, Bear gmail.com> wrote:>. The money is in the lens.
seconded
--
Vass
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BearBear Date: Sep 2, 2008 17:03
> On 2 Sep, 14:39, Bear gmail.com> wrote:>> So I'm looking through my holiday pics, and they're ... ok ... I could
>> blame myself for their slight crapness, but I'd much rather blame my
>> Fuji FinePix 9500, as that would absolve me of blame ... other decent
>> digital cameras I've tried seem so much easier to use for sports
>> photography, and the lens isn't interchangeable on this one either, so
>> what sort of money do I have to spend to get something good for
>> sports/motorsports photography?
>>
>> I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
>> Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
>> something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
>> decent?
>>
>> And then what lens? From experiments with my own kit, I was thinking
>> something zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent) - am I heading
>> in the right direction?
>> ...
|
| Show full article (3.05Kb) |
| 7 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: BearBear Date: Sep 2, 2008 17:04
In article reader.motzarella.org>, ogden
says...> Bear wrote:
>> I'm thinking Nikon, as I've always got on with their stuff more than
>> Canon, but maybe there's a stand-out Canon I should look at, or even
>> something else ... is £500 for the body alone enough to get something
>> decent?
>>
>> And then what lens? From experiments with my own kit, I was thinking
>> something zoom-ish in the 300-500mm range (or equivalent) - am I heading
>> in the right direction?
>
> I've got a Nikon D40 and it's absolutely fine. They're peanuts to buy
> now (250 quid or so), as they're last year's thing, but 500 quid for a
> body alone will easily get you something semi-professional.
>
> Lens-wise, I have the standard kit 18-55 zoom lens and a 55-200. I
> picked up a 70-300 VR zoom a few months ago (all Nikon lenses) and it
> seems absolutely fine. That's equivalent to 450mm on 35mm so probably
> around the size you're looking for. Anything longer than that and ...
|
| Show full article (1.34Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
