Canon Digital Rebel vs. Nikon N75

[djnsmith7]

I'm new to this forum & photography. This will be my 1st camera & I want it to be able to grow as I do.

Can the Digital Rebel handle high speed action photos? Specifically, snapping shots of motorcycles racing by at 150-190 mph. I will be taking photos twice a year at the races.

I'm under the impression that the N75, with the right Nikkor lense & the right speed film, can handle these shots at high speeds. Do you agree or disagree?

This camera will be used primarily for still portrait & landscape shots. I want to enlarge pictures up to 20x36. I understand the Digital Rebel would be best for this because the pictures wouldn't lose quality.

I like the Digital Rebel because it would save a lot on film & processing. But if the camera can't handle the high speed action shots, it won't work for me. Is there a Canon lense that would make it work?

Thank you in advance for your input. I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to be specific.

 

[drlynn]

I can't speak to the digital side, but there are plenty of people around here who can.

I can tell you that yes, the Nikon (or any comparable film-based SLR) can do all the things you want to do with a camera.

Stopping action such as racing motorcyces is a matter of shutter speed. This means you will need to pick film and a lens which will allow you to use 1/500 or faster shutter speeds. This topic can be expanded if need be later on.

Landscapes and portraits generally use lower shutter speeds, and finer grain film. I haven't seen anything which convinces me that a digital camera (short of the Hasselblad H1 with the new Kodak 16.6MP digital back) can beat Fuji Velvia ISO 50 for breathtaking landscapes.
Fuji and Kodak both make special portrait film, specially balanced to produce accurate flesh tones and warm colors. I like Fuji NPS 160, but I have also heard good things about Kodak Portra 160VC.

I'll leave it to someone else to tackle the basics of digital SLR's and the Digital Rebel in particular.

 

[voodoocat]

I think you would still see some noise or pixellation on a 20x36 print with the digital. Poster size enlargments are almost always done on a large format camera. Or that kodak 16mp digital back

 

[doxx]

The 300D is fast enough in the sense of shutter speed/ISO/lenses, if you're looking for burst mode, it is limited to 2.5 fps - buffer size is enough for 4 images (if I recall this right)

check here for opinions on digital print sizes http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0063fQ

 

[havoc]

Yeah, if your going to be doing sports photography, you might wanna consider the frames per second capabilities in picking your camera.
2.5 fps is ok for catching a series of action shots, the Canon Elan 7 is capable of 4 fps, as well as the Maxxum 9 and 9xi, IMHO those would be a better choice for sports photography, they all have extremly fast shutter speeds and more options than most people would use. Canon is a good choice for film SLR if your going digital in the future as well since the lenses are compatible with either.

Alot of people stand by Nikon's though, they make great cameras.

 

[drlynn]

Hey , Voodoo, have you seen that new back for the H1?
I read an article, I think in Shutterbug about it. That machine is AWESOME! (but for a $12,000 back for a $5,800 camera, it SHOULD be awesome!)

Let me know when you save anough lunch money to buy half of 1, we'll split it!