sports camera/lens(es)

I am an avid baseball fan and have gotten into photography lately. Can anyone suggest a camera and lens(es) for my new hobby. I was originally thinking of the Canon 20D and have started to lean towards the EOS Rebel XT. The small downgrade in camera will help put more money towards the lens(es). I would like to keep the budget within $1500.

Just as an FYI... I like taking action shots as well as various stadium pictures.

Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

One thing to consider about the XT is the lack of AI Servo in anything but "sports mode." You really want AI Servo available in all modes including manual.

(AI Servo is what keeps a moving object in focus. This is needed a lot in sports.)

You might want to consider a used 20D which can be purchased for $900 or so for nice ones. (The price may fall some in a couple of months when the new replacement is announced.)

For baseball, you will want a long lens. If you can shoot in daylight most of the time and are on a budget, the new 70-300mm IS might work for you. It is a consumer lens but since you are on a budget and need reach.

I better lens that won't have as much reach would be the 70-200 f4L which is considered to be one of Canons better lenses.

For wide, you just mght pick a prime like the 35 f2 which is fast and sharp. However, it wnt be real wide on a 20D or an XT as the focal length is multiplied by 1.6. (That is good for you on the telephoto end but bad on the wide end.)

If you have a more moderate budget, I would suggest a 20D with grip, 70-200mm f4L, 1.4x TC, 17-40mm f4L, and a 50mm f1.8. This would get you a decent package for daylight and well lit night games plus have many other uses.
--
Catch me at a Purdue Mens Basketball game!

Gear in Profile

JimmyJames said:

One thing to consider about the XT is the lack of AI Servo in
anything but "sports mode." You really want AI Servo available in
all modes including manual.

(AI Servo is what keeps a moving object in focus. This is needed a
lot in sports.)

Click to expand...

Actually, it's the Rebel that doesn't have AI Servo in anything but "Sports Mode"... the XT does allow you to use One Shot focus, AI Servo or AI Focus in the Creative modes.

Jimmy sorry to correct you but the XT does have AI Servo. It's FPS is lower than 20D though. This being said I have as my second camera an original Drebel and AI Focus at 2.5FPS I still got very nice pro-football photos with it. I intentionally brought it to the last CFL game I went to just to see if it could do the job and it did alright.

As for suggestions I agree on the Canon 70-200 F4 L but will also suggest to the original poster to look at the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 APO HSM for about the same price as the Canon or a Sigma 100-300 F4. APO HSM (my personal future choice for a big lens.)

If one gets an XT and any of these lenses here the price will be close to $1500. He can use the kit lens for shorter focal distances in the mean time.

--
visit my photo gallary of images from my 10D

http://phileas.fotopic.net/c258181.html

What if I were able to bump my budget into the 2k range? My budget of $1500 isn't necessarily set in stone, just a realistic approach to find a bargain. Coming from a Minolta Z2, I thought a thousand dollar upgrade would suffice. Also, I have taken some pretty amazing shots with that slow camera and didn't know if I needed a significant upgrade. However, I would like to keep the hobby and camera going for years to come. Would you guys strongly recommend going with the 20d? Thanks again for your input. I appreciate it.

For baseball reach is everything. 200mm will not get you much at all. On a budget, you might consider the 300 f/4. Much more useful for baseball.
--
Steve Mitchell
http://www.dphoto.us
http://www.musicpix.net

The Minolta I have is a 10x optical. What does that translate to in SLRs? What lens would I need to have a comparable zoom?

As others have said, 200mm for baseball is really not enough. I personally would not consider the XT as the 20D provides a number of advantages and will serve you well for a longer period of time. Pull the specs for both and see for yourself. Now all bets are off if you get bit by the sports photog bug. Symptoms are an unquenchable thirst for speed (high fps) that only the 1DMkII can begin to cure.

As far as lenses go, you need to be able to reach to where a 300mm can get you. A compromise to consider, a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 (non-IS) which can be found for approx $900. Add a 1.4 TC and you are almost there. On top of that you have a lens that can operate in less light and still provide the shutter speed for sports. This lens is considered to be one of Canon's top that will stay with you for many years and is considered by many to be a requirement in their bag.

Point I'm making is that if you are going to spend some money, try to position yourself to aquire equipment that is of good quality and flexible in working with numerous photo situations thus providing you many years of fine service. Otherwise you keep on spending more to continually upgrade as you realize the need for equipment that can perform at a higher level to match your continually improving photography skills.

It a fun ride, with a lot of rewards and can be done on a reasonable budget. Used 20D= $950, Used 70-200 f/2.8 (non-IS) = $900, 1.4x TC= $150...... Grand Total $2000 This outfit should serve well as you grow and your skills improve.

Matt

Oh, and GO PURDUE!

Matt - Class of '75

Check out fredmiranda.com and go to the buy and sell forum.

Alot of camera equipment for low prices. I mean they sell everything in there but a lot of 20'ds are up for sale.

There are some kits on sale for $1100 including battery grip, batteries and even cf cards.
I got my 20d, 18-55mm , 2 batteries, and a grip for $1125
A Sigma 1.4 tc for $140
And a Sigma 100-400 f/4 for $670.
All products used and in mint condition.
Theres a 100-400 f/4 over there for $585

jim

I agree with the other posters, a 20D would probably be a better camera for sports, faster af and faster frame rate, 5fps is very useful for sports. Definatly get the grip as it makes hand holding either camera with a long lens much easyer. As for lenses, something in the 300 range would be useful. I would concider the 70-200 f4L with the 1.4 TC or the 200 f2.8L with both the 1.4 and 2 x teleconverters. I think the 200 is a better choice for sports as it focus faster and you have one extra stop for darker situations. To that I would add the 100 f2 or the 85 f1.8 for action closer up and night / indoor shots. For the time I would stick with the kit lens for wide angle, the value can't be beat and you can upgrade later.
--
Tom in Montreal, equipment list in profile

BIG10PURDUE said:

The Minolta I have is a 10x optical. What does that translate to
in SLRs? What lens would I need to have a comparable zoom?

Click to expand...

Minolta 10x (eg. DiMAGE Z2) with 1/2.5' sensor and 6.3-63mm lens which is 38-380mm of 35mm equivalent. Divided by 1.6 cropped factor, you will need 24-240mm range of lenses on 20D.

BiG,

To decide between a Rebel XT and a 20D you need to ask yourself are the features the 20D offers worth you bumping your budget up. It would be too easy for any of us to spend your money. Invariably the 20D offers you more but are those things that you truly want and need for the added costs? If you truly have a budget to reflect going up to a 20D then I would say go ahead and don't look back. But if you are just wanting to go to the 20D just because, it may not be the best chioce.

Get yourself a coffee or an beverage of your choice and havea good read of the DP reviews of both cameras and decide for yourself.

--
visit my photo gallary of images from my 10D

http://phileas.fotopic.net/c258181.html

Here is my recommendation for $2K budget:

1. Rebel XT with 18-55 kit lens. Yes 20D is better but does not leave much room in the budget for a fast telephoto lens. You can get this for around $850 new. Sometimes, there are even better deals. (e.g. you may be able to get it from Dell for less than $800 next Thursday morning)

2. 70-200 f/2.8L. This can be bought for about $1140 new. Good used copies goes for as low as $900.

3. Kenko/Tamron/Tokina MC7 2x teleconverter. Price is somewhere between $110-$140. Will extend the range of your 70-200 to 140-400 at the expense of some IQ.

Since the lower price 70-200 f/2.8L does not have IS, you may want to get a monopod (e.g. Bogen 679B).

If you want to go with the 20D, another lens option is the new 70-300 IS. This should be fast enough on most sunny days and it has IS.

I really appreciate all of the awesome feedback. Thanks guys. I do have another question. Historically, night shots have been a hurdle that I have yet to overcome. To improve on sports night shots, would you still consider the lenses mentioned in these threads, or would I have to start looking in another direction (without sacrificing the daytime shots)?

Thanks again!

Faster lenses work best under nightime lights. That and/or bumping up ISO of the camera. It's hard to say how effective any will be until you shoot out under night time game lighting that you will attend.

The pro football game I shot with my Drebel and a lowely 75-300 F4.0-5.6 Canon lens was under the lights of a dome staduiim B.C. Place in Vancouver. I was able to get high enough shutter speeds and still decent apertures of between F5.6 to F8.0 while shooting between 400 or 800 ISO. The images came out pretty good to grreat in some cases for such a entry level lens. Had I had atleast a constant F4.0 zoom I'd have gotten 1-2 extra stops of light or as such higher shutter speeds. F2.8 would have given me more room to play. Maybe next year though.
--
visit my photo gallary of images from my 10D

http://phileas.fotopic.net/c258181.html

Well, we will need a definition of what sort of night sports? EX) A well lit NFL stadium provides significantly more light than ANY high school and therefore one can potentially get away with less than a f/2.8 lens depending on what you are looking to shoot. If its high school or even college I would bet you need the f/2.8 and will also be shooting at high ISO (1600-3200) to get shutter speeds remotely close to 1/400. You can augment the poor lighting by using a flash and a flash extender (Better Beamer).

As an example here is a shot taking under the lights using a 300 mm L f/2.8 using the above. (specs: 1/800 ISO 1600 distance was approx 50 ft)



Regards,
Matt

I take a majority of my pictures at Pro venues. I have season tickets for the Cubs and Bears, but I also go to various MLB stadiums throughout the year. An occasional visit to college football stadiums is on my calendar, as well (Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan, etc.) But, I have no interest in high school sports or covering the local water balloon fight at the rec center. This is merely a hobby of mine and have no interest in working for a newspaper. However, if the Cubs came along and offered a job... I'm all over it!

Thanks, again!

It must be nice not to be given a hard time when trying to bring in camera gear into a professional venue. In the NYC area, they won't let you bring in long lenses. I can only get away with my 85m 1.8!