Budget camera for sports shots

[EightySix Four]

My little brother (12) has started to become quite interested in photography and would like a camera for Christmas. The budget is $300-$400 and there seem to be a number of good cameras in that price range, but I need one which focuses and takes shots quickly. He mainly wants to use it for photographing football games (so a solid optical is nice too).

Thanks in advance!

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Nikon D70S 6.1 Megapixel Digital Slr Camera With 18-70mm Lens
Used from Adorama - $329.00. (30 day no-questions-asked return policy).

http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20464167.html

 

[Kaido]

Nikon D70S 6.1 Megapixel Digital Slr Camera With 18-70mm Lens
Used from Adorama - $329.00. (30 day no-questions-asked return policy).

http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20464167.html

This was my first dSLR and it was amazing. My wife used it for wedding & portrait photography for years, and we still use it as a backup cam. I would also recommend this camera for the budget.

 

[RobDickinson]

Used canon 20d or30d. 5fps great AF good IQ.

 

[Throckmorton]

Sony HX100V

It has a 30x lens and can shoot 10fps

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Wow, that D70S is a great deal. Go for that, OP.

 

[xchangx]

Ok, speaking from a professional sports photographer. He's going to need at least a 70-200 2.8 for sports. The kit lens isn't going to do squat.

It's definately not a cheap venture.

 

[Jawo]

Classic debate between focusing quickly and long distance shooting. I agree with xchangx that any worthwhile telephoto lens for shooting football will be well north of $1k. On the flip side, the megazoom P&S cameras can't do low light well as you get lots of chromatic grain.

 

[gar655]

If the football is going to always occur during the day then he could get by with one of the newer high zoom point and shoot models. Just don't expect to get SI type images. The depth of field will be WAY too much. In other words the shots will look like they came from a point and shoot.

A decent SLR and lens even used is going to be north of a $1K.

You/he need to decide on what photographic level you'll be satisfied with.

If nighttime football is in the equation- don't even bother with a point and shoot.

Gene

 

[dougp]

Ok, speaking from a professional sports photographer. He's going to need at least a 70-200 2.8 for sports. The kit lens isn't going to do squat.

It's definately not a cheap venture.

He could probably get away with using an A33 or A55 + a beercan.

 

[xchangx]

He could probably get away with using an A33 or A55 + a beercan.

Yes and no... With the A55 he should be able to get his ISO high enough to compensate the f5.6 he'll have to shoot wide open, but it'll look horrible.

That's for nighttime shooting. I've shot highschool football and basketball at ISO 10,000 just to get a shutterspeed of 1/400 or 1/500 @ 2.8, which is pretty much the minimum to stop motion.

There's no way you're going to be able to shoot at f5.6 in that kind of light.

 

[dougp]

Yes and no... With the A55 he should be able to get his ISO high enough to compensate the f5.6 he'll have to shoot wide open, but it'll look horrible.

That's for nighttime shooting. I've shot highschool football and basketball at ISO 10,000 just to get a shutterspeed of 1/400 or 1/500 @ 2.8, which is pretty much the minimum to stop motion.

There's no way you're going to be able to shoot at f5.6 in that kind of light.

Eh, the beercan can do f/4 - but it's not the sharpest at 210mm and f/4. Granted, that'd be 315mm since the A55 isn't FF. I don't think he's looking to get much out of this with what he's asking budget wise, though.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

I don't think that anybody is expecting professional level results from a $300-$400 budget. A low-end/used DSLR will give better FPS, AF and high ISO performance than a P&S. So maybe the pics will just turn out a little bit blurry instead of completely blurry. He can get a better lens at a later time if he decides to continue with it.

 

[shimpster]

s95

 

[twistedlogic]

The budget is $300-$400

Ugh, why you gotta ruin all the fun and post a budget, . I kid.

As mentioned above, night time football games under sup-par lightning is a photographers nightmare. It takes big, expensive glass and a nice expensive Full Frame body to deliver decent results.

With that in mind you could start his venture with first buying him a DSL-R body and let him learn how to use it before jumping into the deep end.

 

[SecurityTheatre]

Unfortunately, "sports" and "budget" are mutually exclusive.

If he is looking to do SI-style "ball in the air" type shots, you're going to have serious trouble getting anything worthwhile for football in the $400 range. However, if the understanding is that he learns to use it and then upgrades the lenses to handle it, that D70 is great.

The D70 can mount any lens, including the 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, which could really do a passable job as a very basic professional kit. The lens is about $500-600, but it's really sweet for that kind of work.

There's a reason all the photographers on the sidelines at the games have massive gear. The most important thing, to my eye, about great sports photos is isolating the subject. Often this means getting the background to blur and fade into the... well... background. And that requires big glass, there are few, if any shortcuts around that.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

Ok, speaking from a professional sports photographer. He's going to need at least a 70-200 2.8 for sports. The kit lens isn't going to do squat.

It's definately not a cheap venture.

Remember, this is for a 12 year old who is starting to get interested in photography. That D70 will do a lot.

Besides, he still has $70 in his budget, and I know you can buy the non-VR 55-200 used for $94 from Adorama. Even cheaper from an individual.

Other options include the older 70-210. Thanks to the Ken Rockwell article, the prices on the "D" version of this lens have doubled, but the non-d version can be had in good condition for around $60.

There is also the old 70-210 f/4 fixed aperture lens that has a lot of good reviews. But would run a bit over $100.

Then there is the 70-300 af-d that can be had used on Adorama for $74 or new for $114.

JR

 

[CuriousMike]

If the football is going to always occur during the day then he could get by with one of the newer high zoom point and shoot models.

+1

 

[Throckmorton]

Like I said... buy a superzoom. What is he going to do with an SLR with a 4x zoom lens? Walk out on the football field?

 

[twistedlogic]

Like I said... buy a superzoom. What is he going to do with an SLR with a 4x zoom lens? Walk out on the football field?

There is always the Super Bigma,

It's only a 2.5X zoom but at least I can hand hold it:

He he

 

[saied129]

i know some cameras can shoot more than 20fps >>>>

 

[xchangx]

Needless to say, sports is the hardest type of photography to get started in. Why? Barriers to entry. The cost is just too high. Sure you can do some with a 70-200 and a Canon XTi. But in order to set yourself apart from everyone else that just isn't going to do it. Trust me, I was in that situation...

Now, I think we've gone a little ahead of ourselves. He's just a beginner right? Get him a used camera around the $200-300 mark and a 50 1.8. Let him use that to learn the basics then move him up. Giving him a kit lens and throwing him out on a field is not a good idea and I'm sure he'll give up really quickly.

 

[Throckmorton]

Why is it that mirrorless cameras from Sony and Panasonic can't shoot more than 5 or 7fps? My Sony superzoom with CMOS sensor does 10fps.

 

[twistedlogic]

My Sony superzoom with CMOS sensor does 10fps.

Your Superzoom can do 10fps but:

"The only fly in the ointment is that once the burst is completed, it takes over fifteen seconds for the camera to clear the buffer, during which you cannot take another picture."

And that is JPEG only. No RAW available.

 

[dougp]

Why is it that mirrorless cameras from Sony and Panasonic can't shoot more than 5 or 7fps? My Sony superzoom with CMOS sensor does 10fps.

The A33 can do 7fps, A55 can do 10fps, A35 can do 10fps, A65 can do 10fps and the A77 can do 12fps. These are all in their continuous mode. And I can guarantee you my A33 can produce better pictures from it's 7fps than your superzoom can with it's 10fps.