Upgrading current camera

Pat Dunne

Will be upgrading my camera in the next few months and I am lookng for some advice on what would be a good move.

I have a budget of €1000 for a DSLR.
I will be using it for sport photography other events such as indoor press receptions and out door group photos.

Any advice would be appreicated.

CrazyTrain

I'm in the same position, I'm upgrading over the next few weeks also so I've done a bit of (actually a lot of) research on it and I've decided to go for a Canon 50D. Of course I have a Canon already (400D) so you might be in a different position. The 50D would fall into your price range, has fast auto focus, 15.0 mega pixels, 6.3 fps, high res 3" lcd, live view etc... For me anyway it ticks all the boxes and with the 6.3 fps would be very useful for sports which is one of your requirements. Hope this helps.

Tactical

Unfortunately you'll find it difficult to get a body that'll fit everything you've described for that price.

At that money you're definately talking second hand and well used too.

Perhaps a very well worn EOS 5D or other manufacturer equivalent but you'll probably want something with a faster fps for sports shots.

wersal gummage

Tactical wrote: »

Unfortunately you'll find it difficult to get a body that'll fit everything you've described for that price.

At that money you're definately talking second hand and well used too.

Perhaps a very well worn EOS 5D or other manufacturer equivalent but you'll probably want something with a faster fps for sports shots.

i wouldn't agree with you there.

a 40d/50d would be fine with the right lense.

the 5d wouldn't be the right camera in my view at all. and a 'very well worn' one for a grand is pushing it. a brand new 5d body is 1378 euro on keaphoto at the moment. why would you buy a very well worn one for only a 300 euro saving.

Slidinginfinity

NIKON

Ballyman

I agree here. The 40/50D is an excellent piece of kit. High useable ISO range for indoor work and at over 6fps is excellent for sport.

On the Nikon side of things the D300 is the winner. Bit more expensive than the Canon 50D but it does have a higher fps at 8 when a battery pack is attached.

Obviously none of this really matters of course if your lens isn't up to scratch.

Howitzer

I moved from 400d to 40d recently and was very lucky to find the perfect seller.
Receipt, box, and all the bits cd's etc. Second bit of luck was to get it for sub sub 600. It really was a bit of a one off I think - but keep your eyes peeled.
A lot of 40d'ers will be moving to 5d mkII's - and that takes every penny!

As for the camera - I'm happy with its fast shooting and bigger grip vs the 400d.
Better menu layout, higher/cleaner iso and mag-alloy body are a plus too.
Hopefully it'll keep me going for a few years and I can concentrate on better lenses.

I'd like to try a 50d - very similar on paper except more pixels.
I just wonder have they squashed too many pixels onto the same sized sensor. That would be my feeling - but I have no experience with the camera so can't comment fully - it's just bits and pieces I have read.

wersal gummage

Ballyman wrote: »

I agree here. The 40/50D is an excellent piece of kit. High useable ISO range for indoor work and at over 6fps is excellent for sport.

On the Nikon side of things the D300 is the winner. Bit more expensive than the Canon 50D but it does have a higher fps at 8 when a battery pack is attached.

Obviously none of this really matters of course if your lens isn't up to scratch.

^

what he said.

and - the other reason to pick a 40/50d for sport is the 1.6x sensor.

wersal gummage

Howitzer wrote: »

I'd like to try a 50d quote]


i've a 50d.

if you want to try it in north dublin send me a PM - ps - i carry an axe, am married to my cousin and have webbed feet:D (only messing - if you want to try it give me a shout).

CabanSail

I would be approaching this from a different angle.

Why not look at the lens/es that you need for doing this & then look at a Body to suit.

The big money is probably going to be in the lens for the Sport.
What Sport are you planning on shooting?
How long & fast will you require?


My suspicion is that you will be lucky if your budget will be more than blown on glass alone, never mind the body.

Tactical

Looking at the variety of replies to the OP I have re-thought my first post on the subject.

I guess I had thought that perhaps you were looking at pro shots with the variety of situations you had mentioned and I didn't comment on lens since you didn't mention them.

If you're trying to achieve a professional result then you'll need professional equipment. There are a lot of bodies available but given the limited amount of information provided I decided to err on the side of caution and recommend a body that would be capable of professional results but note that while I suggested the EOS 5D as a minimum standard I did state "or other manufacturers equivalent".

Perhaps if you were to come back with a little more information as to the end use of the shots and what you're trying to achieve then you may get some more specific advise.

Many different bodies have been mentioned, each having their own merits and drawbacks depending on what your intended use is.

Trojan911

I upgraded recently from a 400D to a 50D. With some advice from posters here & some internet research I went the few bob extra and got the 50D.

I find it a great camera and the fast fps (6.3) is what I am looking for. The lens that came with it is a 17mm-85mm IS USM lens. I also splashed out on a Canon Speedlite 430EX II, & the retailer upgraded the CF card to a 4GB Extreme IV and yes, I am officially skint for the next nine months. Some of my images should be in the Mirror today.

Pat Dunne

Thank for the answers folks.

I will need something suitable for high speed sport photos go to alot of motorbike races.

But at the other end of the scale I also attend a lot of press recptions and conferences, (group shots, speakers etc) usually held in rooms with poor light sources.

You have given me so food for thought but any other ideas would be gratefull appreciated.

wersal gummage

to get really nice shots at something like motorbike racing you're probably going to need to spend about a thousand on a lense alone i'd say. - all the really nice bike shots i've seen are 2.8 aperture on 200mm and 300mm focal length.

check out this flickr site (dont know the person at all)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rev-up4dsi_aidan/

kumate_champ07

canon eos 1d mkII £690 50,000 actucations(still alot of life left)

http://www.apertureuk.com/used-Can.htm

ive been in that shop in london and ive bought from them from online, good people.




eos 40d new 800dollars(no import tax)

http://www.thecheetahexpress.com/product.asp?pID=52&cID=32

i bought a new macbook pro from them last year, cost me just over 1200euro, it was 1800euro from the irish apple store

kumate_champ07

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

canon eos 1d mkII £690 50,000 actucations(still alot of life left)

http://www.apertureuk.com/used-Can.htm

ive been in that shop in london and ive bought from them from online, good people.




eos 40d new 800dollars(no import tax)

http://www.thecheetahexpress.com/product.asp?pID=52&cID=32

i bought a new macbook pro from them last year, cost me just over 1200euro, it was 1800euro from the irish apple store

cr4p, just notice the 1d mkII is reserved, they get them in often enough, im very happy with mine, i use it for concert photography and other action photography, the 1.3 crop ratio makes a noticable difference when using wide angle lenses, full frame would be nice but its a nice compromise

Cupart

I'm for Nikon any day as I feel their light measuring is far better than Canon's. Ok, Canon's AF might be tad better than Nikon's but over all I guess there isn't much of a difference. It all comes down to what YOU feel is the better of the two and what you are used to use. My first SLR was a Nikon and therefore I have stuck to Nikon all these years.

Anyhow, upgraded my old Nikon D70 to a D90 in October and find it brilliant. It's like the D300 less a few extras and AF areas. It's like a wolf in sheep’s clothes. Good value for money if you ask me. It does have some weird implementations we could be with out like HD recording at 720p and the Live View... Stupid if you ask me.

Correctly as some one else said earlier, spend your money on good lenses first and then get a body that suits. There is nothing worse than a brilliant body with cr@p glass and you will be kicking yourself for spending your hard earned cash the wrong way around.

Get some good all round lenses and you'll be laughing. I hardly use any other lenses than my Sigma f/4 10-20mm, Nikon f/1.8 50mm, and Nikon 18-105 VR lens (not the best in the world but great all round) for trips and holiday shots. Get some filters (UV and Polarization) as well and you are pretty much there...

Oh, did I answer your query at all?

anoble66

remember your going to need to set a chunk of cash aside for the lens, if your going to be shooting motorbike racing you will definitely need a 2.8 lens with a decent zoom....but they are not cheap. I am finding the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 nice and fast, and you can get it for around 650e. You could always then put on a 1.4 converter, if you find you need more zoom but your lens will drop to f/4.0....couple that with the 50D and you will be laughing.

kumate_champ07

the lens is very important but for action u need very good auto focus and servo tracking, fast fps,large buffer and a decent iso1600 and iso3200.

i keep in camera noise reduction off in my eos 1dmkII as i can get much better results with noise ninja. iso1600 and f2-f2.8 is where im usually at

angela59

Hi,

Sorry to jump on board during discussion. I'm trying to decide wheter to purchase a canon eos 1000d or nikon D40. I had my heart set on canon eos 1000d and am torn between the two. Btw the canon eos 1000d is E143 cheaper up north in Argos - unfortunately out of stock. I can get a NIkon D40 or D60. I'll be using it for portraits and landscapes mainly. Any advice greatly appreciated.:)

Angela59

kumate_champ07

angela59 wrote: »

Hi,

Sorry to jump on board during discussion. I'm trying to decide wheter to purchase a canon eos 1000d or nikon D40. I had my heart set on canon eos 1000d and am torn between the two. Btw the canon eos 1000d is E143 cheaper up north in Argos - unfortunately out of stock. I can get a NIkon D40 or D60. I'll be using it for portraits and landscapes mainly. Any advice greatly appreciated.:)

Angela59

and 70pound cheaper than argos here! http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1027222

Pat Dunne

Cheers folks for all the advice.

I've heard that Nikon have a D5000 coming out in the US in a few week time. With the body, a 18 + 55 and a 55 +200 lens bundle for around $1100.

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/nikon-hits-the-sweet-spot-with-new-d5000/?em

It's suppose to offer the best of both worlds between a D60 and a D90. Any comments?

Cupart

Pat Dunne wrote: »

Cheers folks for all the advice.

I've heard that Nikon have a D5000 coming out in the US in a few week time. With the body, a 18 + 55 and a 55 +200 lens bundle for around $1100.

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/nikon-hits-the-sweet-spot-with-new-d5000/?em

It's suppose to offer the best of both worlds between a D60 and a D90. Any comments?

Hi Pat,

I'd go for the body only and get another lens than the ones advertised. If you absolutely want a kit go for the 18-55mm only as the 55-200 doesn't do the job good enough compared to the premium price added to the kit. This is my own opinion, and as said earlier, you will be kicking yourself for not getting the right stuff from the beginning, something I unfortunately did...

Let's hear how you got along...

Cherrio...

Pat Dunne

Cheers, will take that on board.