My first DSLR - need advice!

[KEF]

I am looking to buy my first DSLR and am overwhelmed by the choices! I have 3 active boys and am looking for a camera that is as fast as they are - my budget is $700.

I want to shoot at their sporting events and school plays and basically get the good shots I am missing with my point and shoot. I need a camera with little lag time between pressing the button and hearing "click" and I need a decent zoom - those are my two biggest wants in a DSLR. I know nothing about lenses, so I'm hoping you all can educate me on what to start with also.

Thanks!

K

 

[timethief]

Welcome to the forum.
you might want to try looking at The best cameras
basically you can compare cams agaisnt each other and have a rough idea on specs, pros and cons..

good luck.

 

[Futurelight]

I personally shoot canon and find them more than adequate for surf photography (where it needs to have very fast reflex). I have also used canon for doing skateboard events. They lack a little when it comes to nature photography but not enough to really complain about.

 

[Dunkuk]

For my weddings I use Canon pro gear, but for when Im out and about I needed something more portable! For that I have the Canon G9 - I think there is a G11 now. Its great because the movie mode allows me to do video blogs for you tube too

 

[ConradM]

I would suggest a Sony a33, it's literally the fastest camera under $700 (7fps burst shooting). You would also need a separate zoom lens like a 55-200mm so plan on spending more than $700 whichever way you go.

 

[Sean1965]

Personally I would suggest a rebel XTI or XSI and here is why. I bought one and in 1 years time the value dropped 50% lenses however don't drop and as you will quickly find out lenses make your shots more so then a camera thus a XTI you can probably pick up for just under 300 new with a warranty, and then have like 400 toward a kick ass lens you can buy a really nice sigma 17 50 lens with a constant 2.8 aperture and a great warranty for around 600 new. You will find out really fast that a great camera is nice but the nuts and bolts of any good camera is the lenses so put the money into a great lens and then upgrade your camera later. Also this way of thinking kind of protects you if you fall away from the hobby because the resale on lenses is way higher then the resale on a camera.

Tutorial Lenses

PhotoMatters Home | photomatters

 

[MLeeK]

Here's what it boils down to: It doesn't matter which DSLR you buy on the market today. They all make great cameras and they all do essentially the same thing.
Until you learn about exposure AND invest in some extra expensive lenses and flash you are still going to get the same results. It's not these big fancy cameras that allow us to get the shots that you aren't getting, it's knowledge of how to use the equipment-mostly. These DSLR's all do exactly the same thing your point and shoot is doing until you combine them with knowledge...
HOWEVER-for school plays and indoor sporting events, night football? Equipment does matter. You will need a "fast" lens to go on that DSLR. A "fast" lens is one that has a very wide aperture or low f/ number. Because the aperture is so large it allows in more light than other lenses making it possible to shoot in conditions where you are not able to shoot without adding flash with another camera or lens. Or your DSLR will be doing exactly what a point and shoot does.
SO... Your $700 in camera isn't going to get you that-mostly. You can purchase a camera kit and a 50mm f/1.8 lens under your budget and the 50mm lens will allow you to shoot indoors without adding flash. It is not any amount of zoom at all. To get zoom and low light you are looking at another $700 on the cheap end and $2500 on the high quality end. That is for the lens only. AND you will have to learn how to use it...

Did I just confuse the snot out of you?
I don't recommend going as far back as the XTi or XSi for what you want to do. I wouldn't go further back than the T1i because of the ISO limitations on the older bodies. If you can raise the ISO higher you can shoot with lenses that aren't as fast in the same situations. Being able to use a high ISO will allow you to use the kit lens in a lot more situations without flash than the older cameras will allow.

 

[shootermcgavin]

I would pool that $700 with a neighbor and buy an awesome set up and share it. Ok maybe I wouldn't but I wish that is the type of world we lived in.

 

[o hey tyler]

I would suggest a Sony a33, it's literally the fastest camera under $700 (7fps burst shooting). You would also need a separate zoom lens like a 55-200mm so plan on spending more than $700 whichever way you go.

It's not particularly good at tracking moving subjects such as kids, or sports due to the EVF and its refresh rate. This is where OVFs have a distinct advantage.

 

[MLeeK]

I forgot to add: If you are wanting to seriously get into photography you definitely want a DSLR, but there are other options if this is ONLY to be a family type camera for a great hobby.

 

[nickzou]

I forgot to add: If you are wanting to seriously get into photography you definitely want a DSLR, but there are other options if this is ONLY to be a family type camera for a great hobby.

I'm sure you can be a pro with a digital rangefinder.

 

[jwbryson1]

Triple your budget for starters.

 

[ConradM]

I would suggest a Sony a33, it's literally the fastest camera under $700 (7fps burst shooting). You would also need a separate zoom lens like a 55-200mm so plan on spending more than $700 whichever way you go.

It's not particularly good at tracking moving subjects such as kids, or sports due to the EVF and its refresh rate. This is where OVFs have a distinct advantage.

Who said anything about using the view finder? When I shoot my kids skating I use the screen flipped down so I can look down at it. Even if I had an optical view finder I wouldn't use it in those instances because you have to get in awkward positions.

 

[o hey tyler]

I would suggest a Sony a33, it's literally the fastest camera under $700 (7fps burst shooting). You would also need a separate zoom lens like a 55-200mm so plan on spending more than $700 whichever way you go.

It's not particularly good at tracking moving subjects such as kids, or sports due to the EVF and its refresh rate. This is where OVFs have a distinct advantage.

Who said anything about using the view finder? When I shoot my kids skating I use the screen flipped down so I can look down at it. Even if I had an optical view finder I wouldn't use it in those instances because you have to get in awkward positions.

Same thing. An EVF is a type of LCD screen. Therefore your rear display also has a refresh rate. You don't see sports shooters composing shots with live view.

 

[ConradM]

It's not particularly good at tracking moving subjects such as kids, or sports due to the EVF and its refresh rate. This is where OVFs have a distinct advantage.

Who said anything about using the view finder? When I shoot my kids skating I use the screen flipped down so I can look down at it. Even if I had an optical view finder I wouldn't use it in those instances because you have to get in awkward positions.

Same thing. An EVF is a type of LCD screen. Therefore your rear display also has a refresh rate. You don't see sports shooters composing shots with live view.

Well then I guess it's a good thing the TS isn't looking to get into professional sports photography. To say that you can't get good actions shots of your kids with an LCD is kind of ridiculous. People have been doing it for years with P&S's.