DSLR for sports photography?

Rekd

TPF Noob!
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
1,272
Reaction score
52
Location
Rural America
Website
amusingscribe.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
For the last several years I've made due as an amateur photographer with a Sony Cyber-shot. I'm doing a lot more motorsports now and the old clunker just isn't cutting it any more.

I want to be able to shoot more than, what...? 2.5 SPF (Seconds Per Frame... :grumpy: )? I've managed to get good shots but I have to work my butt off, and I've obviously lost way more than I've got.

I've looked around and it seems the Nikon D90 might work well. It looks like one of the better lower-end DSLRs. I'm not interested in spending more than a grand for a body and I want the ability to use an MF lens, something I miss with my EOS 750 and 500.

Of course I've considered a Cannon, but the people I've talked to in the business mostly use Nikon. So I'm not sure what the comparable Cannon DSLR would be to something like the D90.

I haven't put my hands on either yet, and I'd like to play touchie-feelie with them both at the same time.

So price being a factor and everything else considered, what is a comparable Cannon to the Nikon D90?

TYIA.
 
Just have to ask... have you already planned out your purchase in terms of glass? The glass itself is more important than the choice of DSLR body.
 
For sports photography the 50D and the 1D MkIII are the bodies that can do the job. The 40D/30D are also good bodies. You want to stay away from entry level bodies. I have yet to find one that has an AF system that is fast enough to keep up with sports. The 1D MkIII is out of your price range. A XXD body either used or new would be good. I have a 40D & a 30D as my second and third bodies.

With that being said, good/fast glass is more important in sports photography. It is where you will spend a lot of money. Sports is my main focus. If you look at my gear list you will see what I am talking about in terms of glass. I own nothing that is slower than f2.8. That does not come cheap. But it allows me to shoot in the worst of venues.

If you are only shooting daytime events with plenty of light, f2.8 glass is not as important, however having that fast of glass, even in good daylight allows for shutter speeds that will not only freeze the action but action you would not expect with slower shutter speeds.

Fast frames per second can be useful, but the Spray & Pray method is not ideal for sports photography. Knowing the sport,the participants and what they do best allows you to anticipate that exact shot that you want and get it where spray and pray may or may not get that exact moment.
 
Is the glass that much different between Nikon and Canon (in terms of $$)?

I don't plan on spending more for the lens' than I am for the body right now. I have heard that some Canon DSLRs will work with my lenses that I run on the EOS' which is part of the reason I'm considering the Canon, but that's a topic for another thread. I also know the D90 can be had with a set of lenses for just a few hundred more.

Considering my still relative newbieness I'm Ok with an inferior lens for now and am more interested in the camera's function and reliability.

I'm sure I can buy very good glass for either camera once I'm ready to move on to that level of expertise. ;)
 
Personally, I would save for the best glass you can afford and then consider used options for the DSLR to go with the glass. It will net you better results than a good camera with inferior glass.
 
D90 does 4.5 frames per second, I've shot little league games with it and my Sigma 18-250 with some good results.
 
For sports photography the 50D and the 1D MkIII are the bodies that can do the job. The 40D/30D are also good bodies. You want to stay away from entry level bodies. I have yet to find one that has an AF system that is fast enough to keep up with sports. The 1D MkIII is out of your price range. A XXD body either used or new would be good. I have a 40D & a 30D as my second and third bodies.

With that being said, good/fast glass is more important in sports photography. It is where you will spend a lot of money. Sports is my main focus. If you look at my gear list you will see what I am talking about in terms of glass. I own nothing that is slower than f2.8. That does not come cheap. But it allows me to shoot in the worst of venues.

If you are only shooting daytime events with plenty of light, f2.8 glass is not as important, however having that fast of glass, even in good daylight allows for shutter speeds that will not only freeze the action but action you would not expect with slower shutter speeds.

Fast frames per second can be useful, but the Spray & Pray method is not ideal for sports photography. Knowing the sport,the participants and what they do best allows you to anticipate that exact shot that you want and get it where spray and pray may or may not get that exact moment.

Lots of good info to consider, thanks! What is the price range of the cheaper upper-end bodies? If it's close to a grand and I can get a lens(es) for just a little more I might consider it.

Imma go make a pot of spaghetti for me and the boys and do some more research.
 
Spray & Pray method is not ideal for sports photography

+1

I don't want to say this out loud, but I've found that when I'm working corners or jumps, I find a spot on the track where I want a good shot and focus on that, then move the FOV to where the vehicle will pass through and I take the shot.

This is part of the reason I wanted something I could put an MF lens on. Maybe I just need to rent something with a better AF motor and see the difference.
 
I got my 50D for under a grand. I got my 70-200 2.8 for under a grand. I would say that the lens is more important that they body, so in your case I would spend around $1000 on a good, fast lens, then a bit more ($400ish) on a decen body (30D).
 
The 50D can do 6.3 frames per second which is quite handy for sports photography. While I don't advocate spray and pray, I do shoot 3-5 frame bursts so I can sort through the shots later and pic the best of the litter.

The 50D has a rock solid AF system, so it can easily track moving targets.

I would put the 50D above the D90.

Next up the ladder is the Nikon D300 which would be ideal, but it would be out of your price range.

I use a 1DMarkIII for fast moving shots and there is nothing else like it on the planet. That thing can track a target enough through other moving subjects and keep focus on the subject you locked on initially. It focuses so fast it's unreal and it is highly configurable. But that's way out of your price range.

I would get a 40D or 50D and a good f/2.8 telephoto like the 70-200 (as it's the most affordable).
 
If you need something to shoot daylight sports like baseball, track and field,soccer, motor sports, the best camera on a budget is the D2x or D2xs. Not really a great High-ISO body, but the wide-area AF is very sophisticated, and the Group Dynamic AF on the D2x or D2xs will give you excellent autofocus on fast action. Camera is a 1.5x at 5 fps, or 8.2 fps at 2.0x. Used prices are very low. Pair it with a decent lens or two for best results.

For indoor sports, it works okay when shooting strobes for basketball or volleyball.
 
For sports photography the 50D and the 1D MkIII are the bodies that can do the job. The 40D/30D are also good bodies. You want to stay away from entry level bodies. I have yet to find one that has an AF system that is fast enough to keep up with sports. The 1D MkIII is out of your price range. A XXD body either used or new would be good. I have a 40D & a 30D as my second and third bodies.

With that being said, good/fast glass is more important in sports photography. It is where you will spend a lot of money. Sports is my main focus. If you look at my gear list you will see what I am talking about in terms of glass. I own nothing that is slower than f2.8. That does not come cheap. But it allows me to shoot in the worst of venues.

If you are only shooting daytime events with plenty of light, f2.8 glass is not as important, however having that fast of glass, even in good daylight allows for shutter speeds that will not only freeze the action but action you would not expect with slower shutter speeds.

Fast frames per second can be useful, but the Spray & Pray method is not ideal for sports photography. Knowing the sport,the participants and what they do best allows you to anticipate that exact shot that you want and get it where spray and pray may or may not get that exact moment.

Lots of good info to consider, thanks! What is the price range of the cheaper upper-end bodies? If it's close to a grand and I can get a lens(es) for just a little more I might consider it.

Imma go make a pot of spaghetti for me and the boys and do some more research.

Used Canon 40D is about $600. Shoots 6.5 FPS. Canon 70-200 f/2.8 is about $1000. Grab that and a 1.4x adapter and you should be golden.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top