Sports Photography Camera choice....

[orb9220]

Budget: $1000 tops for body. <---- No if wanting decent Video
Need: Something that will take great motorcycle racing photo's. <--- As pointed out cameras mentioned. And No we can't get into the Why you should get this or that cam. As there are way to many variables. Beyond what we have already mentioned in this thread.

Want: Video capability <---- Not for $1000 The D90 has video but AF doesn't work while recording. Have to stop and change focus and restart.

Want: A camera that will take older lenses, aka craigslist. <--- Many Nikon can take the older Ai or Ais full manual no AF or metering and AF and AF-D,G lenses that meter and AF just fine.

And please tone it down a bit. We are here to try and help on a very vague and ill defined of what your needs are. You are being way to general of what those needs are.

You have requirements there that cannot be met at the $1000 mark with video.
You have not given any info on budget for lenses. As the body is not the most expensive consideration. For motocross type shooting I would probably get the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D and maybe a 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter. That setup will easily match another $1000. A nikon 70-300vr $400 used may or may not work depending on lighting and weather. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom still costs over $635. And got my Nikon 80-200 f2.8 and tamron 1.4x teleconverter for $800.

I Hope you not expecting a black/white answer saying get THIS! and be done with it.
We are not your brain. You will have to do more research and read about the different cams mentioned. There are no answers here. Just recommendations and experiences of others. Which we all have our own personal biases and preferences which may or may not fit your needs. Only you can determine that.

So comes down to me. I would want more a $1000-$1500 range to get what I may need for sports.
.

 

[KmH]

Canon sports shooters have been switching in droves to Nikon for the last couple, 3 years. It's been well documented.

There are 2 main reasons, Nikon cameras have more accurate, color-aware metering systems, and Nikon cameras produce images with less noise at high ISO settings. Canon now has 3 cameras that have color-aware metering; the 60D, 7D and 1D MKIV.

Granted, the biggest differences are at the pro gear end of the makers lineup.

 

[gsgary]

Any camera can shoot sports, this was taken with an old Canon 10D and 70-200

This was taken with a 1D 300mmF2.8L with 2X fitted so 600mm

It's all down to who is using it, Canon, Nikon, Sony it does not matter

 

[Village Idiot]

WHY should I help some one being snide?

I'm not being "snide", I'm trying to get that facts. I could listen to Nikon guys saying "it's the best", but I want facts that back that up.

Kinda like me saying a kawasaki is better than a honda...just because I like it. No other reason, get it? :thumbup:

I did post one fact.

And Honda sucks, everyone knows the only good motorized vehicle they've ever made is the RC51.

 

[gsgary]

WHY should I help some one being snide?

I'm not being "snide", I'm trying to get that facts. I could listen to Nikon guys saying "it's the best", but I want facts that back that up.

Kinda like me saying a kawasaki is better than a honda...just because I like it. No other reason, get it? :thumbup:

I did post one fact.

And Honda sucks, everyone knows the only good motorized vehicle they've ever made is the RC51.

Rubbish

 

[Village Idiot]

It's still red. ****...I own a triumph, what am I talking about?

 

[orb9220]

As gsgary example has pointed out about cams maybe true. But lenses used were $1000 or more just by themselves. So as pointed out with just a total of $1000 you are limiting yourself drastically.
.

 

[PJL]

And Honda sucks, everyone knows the only good motorized vehicle they've ever made is the RC51.

I dunno...I'd like a Goldwing when I'm old enough to pretend that an 800 lbs. car with a 6 cylinder engine and cushy leather seats that just happens to have 2 wheels is a "motorcycle."

 

[Village Idiot]

And Honda sucks, everyone knows the only good motorized vehicle they've ever made is the RC51.

I dunno...I'd like a Goldwing when I'm old enough to pretend that an 800 lbs. car with a leather seat that just happens to have 2 wheels is a "motorcycle."

Not even close. A Goldwing is a couch on wheels. Couches aren't know for their handling.

 

[Derrel]

Yamaha_gurl...I'll be the second one to state that your $1,000 body limit AND the need for good video is making this almost a fool's errand...

The video requirement eliminates most of the cameras that would be in your price range.

 

[Yamaha_gurl]

Budget: $1000 tops for body. <---- No if wanting decent Video
Need: Something that will take great motorcycle racing photo's. <--- As pointed out cameras mentioned. And No we can't get into the Why you should get this or that cam. As there are way to many variables. Beyond what we have already mentioned in this thread.

Want: Video capability <---- Not for $1000 The D90 has video but AF doesn't work while recording. Have to stop and change focus and restart.

Want: A camera that will take older lenses, aka craigslist. <--- Many Nikon can take the older Ai or Ais full manual no AF or metering and AF and AF-D,G lenses that meter and AF just fine.

And please tone it down a bit. We are here to try and help on a very vague and ill defined of what your needs are. You are being way to general of what those needs are.

You have requirements there that cannot be met at the $1000 mark with video.
You have not given any info on budget for lenses. As the body is not the most expensive consideration. For motocross type shooting I would probably get the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D and maybe a 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter. That setup will easily match another $1000. A nikon 70-300vr $400 used may or may not work depending on lighting and weather. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Telephoto Zoom still costs over $635. And got my Nikon 80-200 f2.8 and tamron 1.4x teleconverter for $800.

I Hope you not expecting a black/white answer saying get THIS! and be done with it.
We are not your brain. You will have to do more research and read about the different cams mentioned. There are no answers here. Just recommendations and experiences of others. Which we all have our own personal biases and preferences which may or may not fit your needs. Only you can determine that.

So comes down to me. I would want more a $1000-$1500 range to get what I may need for sports.
.

Thank you for the suggestions, sorry...didn't mean to get anyones panties in a bunch (oops, there I go again). I'm kidding! I've been researching, getting suggestions, people changing what I should get...for the past 4 days, straight. I do wish there was a list of a few cameras that were truly more for action. You had said that Nikon's will take older lenses...what about the Canons?

 

[gsgary]

And Honda sucks, everyone knows the only good motorized vehicle they've ever made is the RC51.

I dunno...I'd like a Goldwing when I'm old enough to pretend that an 800 lbs. car with a leather seat that just happens to have 2 wheels is a "motorcycle."

Not even close. A Goldwing is a couch on wheels. Couches aren't know for their handling.

They don't handle like these

, i had a go on my mates wing and they are worse than Harleys and thats saying something

 

[Yamaha_gurl]

Yamaha_gurl...I'll be the second one to state that your $1,000 body limit AND the need for good video is making this almost a fool's errand...

The video requirement eliminates most of the cameras that would be in your price range.

That's why I was going towards the D90, since it can take video...and when I say that's a want, that's what it is...just hoping for some easy video capturing of my doggie running around kinda thing, not looking for super fantastic quality. If I drop the video want, what are the things I should be looking for? # of fts? High iso? I dunno...I'm lost

 

[Yamaha_gurl]

Rc51's are tractors...same as with all the other oil leakers ya'll mentioned! In my dreams I'd like an 1198.

But for the time being, I'm on this, can the BMW or Harley do this?:

 

[orb9220]

For Nikon a D90 would be a great start. But will come down to lenses used to give the most usability in lower light and fast moving subjects.

And it's all right to get frustrated. It's easy to get overwhelmed with a complex thing like gear and photography. Just take baby steps. For most I tell them to decide on a canon or nikon. Handle both which feels right? Which has more usable and easy controls for you. For me it was the Nikon.

For $1000 you can get the D90 with the 18-105 kit lens and start to learn and define your needs more. When you get more info on your style and needs. Then you can fine tune and add lenses,flash,tripod,etc.. to your kit depending on need and funds available. As many can get by with great glass and learn to manual focus and meter their shots with older manual lenses. Or spend more for full AF and metering. Only you can justify the cost of your investment by results and joy given in this "Just a Hobby" pastime.

Also recommend to join flickr that have Canon,Nikon camera groups yes D90 groups and specific lenses groups where you can get more detailed responses to your questions and concerns.
.