$1400 budget, need camera+lens for sports

[IgsEMT]

HOW ABOUT GETTING YOUR NOSE BACK IN THE BOOKS EMT GUY!!!!!!

wow,
that was uncalled for.

Sorry, not you. The OP is studying to be an EMT and has tests coming up. I didn't realize you were going to post and have EMT in your name.

I was like shish, granted I went back to school now (who ever knew that going back for 2nd degree is a such a B*tch) no need to be so angry.

But in his defense, EMT course is 75% common sense so hitting those books isn't THAT important
lol

 

[EIngerson]

wow,
that was uncalled for.

Sorry, not you. The OP is studying to be an EMT and has tests coming up. I didn't realize you were going to post and have EMT in your name.

I was like shish, granted I went back to school now (who ever knew that going back for 2nd degree is a such a B*tch) no need to be so angry.

But in his defense, EMT course is 75% common sense so hitting those books isn't THAT important
lol

I sent you a PM. Should clear it up.

 

[Destin]

By the way, I like the ideas being tossed around.

If I had $1700 and watched carefully I could pick up a used d7k on eBay and a used sigma 70-200 of some sort. It would be really tight though.

The d90 is good but I'd prefer slightly better iso performance and a higher frame rate if possible.

Soooo... ***gasp*** I'm thinking about jumping ship to canon to get a 60d used ($780-820 if I'm patient) and then getting a sigma 70-200 for that, because it pulls 5 fps, and has better high ISO performance than a d90. Any comments other than me being a possible traitor?

 

[mjhoward]

80-200 might be a bit cheaper to 1500 and up.

Look into D90 (you can probably find one for about $800 and then spend the rest on the glass.

You need to shop somewhere else!

Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S (asking $800) - FS: Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 AF-S ED lens - FM Forums

Nikon D90 w/ Grip (asking $675) - FS: Nikon D70, D90, Tokina 12-24 f/, 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 - FM Forums

I didn't say it was impossible but prices I'm saying are average prices I've seen in my area based on some specs that OP mentioned. Second, I wouldn't buy anything used from someone I don't know so I rather spend a bit more but purchase it from a store w/ at least some sort of warranty that this gear won't crap out on my in the 1st month of use. It still cheaper then buying new.

I've bought probably half my gear from members there and never had a problem. In fact, most of the stuff I've gotten from there is nearly indistinguishable from new. A few of the items came in the original box with the reciept! If you ever have a problem, well that's what paypal is there for.

 

[mjhoward]

The d90 is good but I'd prefer slightly better iso performance and a higher frame rate if possible.

Soooo... ***gasp*** I'm thinking about jumping ship to canon to get a 60d used ($780-820 if I'm patient) and then getting a sigma 70-200 for that, because it pulls 5 fps, and has better high ISO performance than a d90. Any comments other than me being a possible traitor?

Not according to DXO: DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

D90 scores higher in all categories over the 60D. I believe the AF module in the D90 is better as well which I would imagine to be important for sports.

 

[IgsEMT]

I've bought probably half my gear from members there and never had a problem. In fact, most of the stuff I've gotten from there is nearly indistinguishable from new. A few of the items came in the original box with the reciept! If you ever have a problem, well that's what paypal is there for.

In that case, I'll add that link to my favs
Learn something new (not in books ) everyday.

EMT-GUY lol

 

[Infinite_Day]

I was thinking D90 + 80-200mm as well. Seems like the logical and most cost effective option for two solid pieces of equipment.

 

[jake337]

Dude...I shot a lot of sports gigs with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR Nikkor, and the old Nikon D1h, with its huge pixels...those sell for like $189 these days...

and yes, I am SERIOUS about this...$1400 and you can have that set-up!!! With a second body! (again, not kidding...)

At those prices you could pick up a older tokina/tamron/sigma 300mm f2.8 auto focus as well. If you can find one.

I see a bargain D1h for $119 right now on KEH.com
or d2h for $325.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DN02999079892Z?r=FE

 

[Destin]

At those prices you could pick up a older tokina/tamron/sigma 300mm f2.8 auto focus as well. If you can find one.

I see a bargain D1h for $119 right now on KEH.com
or d2h for $325.
http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DN02999079892Z?r=FE

Right... But what part of good low light performance are you guys missing? My d80 would smoke those things in low light and it sucks by today's standards.

Are you really saying you'd take a d1h over a d90 for night time sports?

 

[KmH]

The d90 is good but I'd prefer slightly better iso performance and a higher frame rate if possible.

Soooo... ***gasp*** I'm thinking about jumping ship to canon to get a 60d used ($780-820 if I'm patient) and then getting a sigma 70-200 for that, because it pulls 5 fps, and has better high ISO performance than a d90. Any comments other than me being a possible traitor?

Not according to DXO: DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

D90 scores higher in all categories over the 60D. I believe the AF module in the D90 is better as well which I would imagine to be important for sports.

And not just the 60D. Stick with Nikon.

Canon's 7D can't beat the D90 either, as far as Raw image quality/ISO performance/color range/dynamic range.
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

 

[jake337]

At those prices you could pick up a older tokina/tamron/sigma 300mm f2.8 auto focus as well. If you can find one.

I see a bargain D1h for $119 right now on KEH.com
or d2h for $325.
Nikon Digital D 2H 4.10 MEGAPIXEL BODY ONLY (CF CARD ) EYEPIECE BLIND INOPERATIVE DIGITAL SLR INTERCHANGEABLE LENS CAMERA - KEH.com

Right... But what part of good low light performance are you guys missing? My d80 would smoke those things in low light and it sucks by today's standards.

Are you really saying you'd take a d1h over a d90 for night time sports?

True but I'm think more in the line that your in school, right? So a digital body is disposable, but the glass you grab will last a lifetime. I think in the long run. So by next year tax time you'll have maybe $1400-2000 dedicated for your body of choice. Used d700 maybe.....

 

[Markw]

If you really MUST stick to your $1400 price budget, the D90 and 80-200/2.8D Nikkor is your best bet. Well, really your only bet. I had the pair for a while, and it worked..well..well. The D90 isn't the best at high-ISO, but neither is my D90, and neither will be my D800. All are better than your D80, though. And certainly better than any blasphemy about a D1h, etc.

But, I mean, there was nothing wrong with your Sigma 70-200, at all. I know of a bunch of people who use that for sports. Both night and day. You probably would have been better off keeping that, and upgrading your body to a higher-end, better-ISO body since the lens will do everything the 70-200 Nikkor will do (just not as well sometimes).

Mark

 

[djacobox372]

You might want to consider a Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 AF-S, which can be had for around $900 used. Pair that lens with a D5100 which sells used for $600 or less. That puts you at about $1500.

The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, but costs a ton less. The only downside for the sort of shooting you do is the frame rate which is 4fps, vs. 6fps with the D7000.

The lack of AF motor in the d5100 isn't a big deal since you will want to stick with AF-S lenses for shooting fast moving subjects.

I'd definitely choose the d5100 over the similarly priced d90, since the sensor performance of the D5100 is superior along with the video.

 

[Destin]

You might want to consider a Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 AF-S, which can be had for around $900 used. Pair that lens with a D5100 which sells used for $600 or less. That puts you at about $1500.

The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, but costs a ton less. The only downside for the sort of shooting you do is the frame rate which is 4fps, vs. 6fps with the D7000.

The lack of AF motor in the d5100 isn't a big deal since you will want to stick with AF-S lenses for shooting fast moving subjects.

I'd definitely choose the d5100 over the similarly priced d90, since the sensor performance of the D5100 is superior along with the video.

Not a bad train of thought, but I don't think I could live without the top screen and dual control wheels. Im just so used to shooting that way.

Plus I like having a battery grip and the ones for the d5100 suck.

 

[jaomul]

Why did you not just upgrade your body, looks like you had a pretty impressive set up already. The nikon 300s with your previous kit would have given 6fps, 8 if you had a grip, may even be a better option than the d7000 cos I think it has a better buffer