Sports Photoghraphy for a newbie

guym

Hi,
Just looking for some pointers or recommendations. My daughters have recently started competing in athletics events and I have been trying to keep a photographic record of their achievements. I only have a very basic compact digital which is fine for stationary shots but I like the idea of being able to take action shots (long jump/sprint finishes etc) that would require a camera capable of taking multiple shots in less than 1 second. Budget is paramount at the moment so what kind of money would I be looking at for a camera capable of this?? Second hand would not be a problem but just don't know what would be a good make/model to keep an eye out for.
Thanks in advance for any input.

Ricky91t

You'd really have to mention a budget or atleast some idea,Chances are you could get pretty decent shots with the compact if you practiced a technique called panning as for a DSLR

You could get a canon 400D/450D with the kit lens,Take 3 photos a second,Don't know how close you get but the kit lens should do for it on a sunny day(if you can get quite close)
These would cost €350/€400+
Next on the list a Canon EOS 40D,This takes 6.5 fps and is generally a much better camera,Better built etc and alot of photographers use them for sports on here,Again i'm not sure how close you can get to the action but the 40D kit lens would do (17-85)
These would cost €600+

Next on the list would be a canon 1D MKIII or MKII these are canon's pro bodies,And do set you back quite abit(my 1D MKII cost about €900).Generally these don't come with a lens and you'd have to invest in a lens on top of this..

Note:Prices are just off the top of my head,And all used prices.

Ballyman

I'm going to make a few presumptions here, mainly that your daughters will be competing outside and it will be reasonably bright and/or sunny days you will be shooting them. Also that you will be able to get within 40-50 metres of them competing. Having said this:

You can buy a second hand camera with a few lenses here for €200 odd and you can get a telephoto lens here, which seems to be free but I would imagine he is looking for €120 odd, which will allow you to take shots from 40-50 metres away.

Now the disclaimer! The camera is fairly old but it will take 3 shots a second for you. The lens also isn't the best but it's the cheapest telezoom you can buy. Also you will be getting a few other lenses with the camera which will allow you to take shots of presentations and family outings etc as they aren't telezooms and are more day to day lenses and for €320 odd you are not going to do any better anywhere.

You can spend €4K on a camera and €7K on a single lens so you will have to understand that the results you get will not be spectacular but with a little research into how the camera and lens work together you should be able to get perfectly good results with the camera and lens mentioned above.

Best of luck!

mrboswell

Look you can spent your mortgage money on camera gear every month if you want - and believe me you always want more!

Simple fact is that you want a record of their achievements so you need an entry level dlsr like the canon 400/450/500 d series. A kit lens and a cheap zoom will do fine. I have a cheap Tamron AF 70-300MM F/4-5.6 that I used a couple of times that you can have cheap if you like.

Walk before you run...

Ricky91t

Ballyman wrote: »

I'm going to make a few presumptions here, mainly that your daughters will be competing outside and it will be reasonably bright and/or sunny days you will be shooting them. Also that you will be able to get within 40-50 metres of them competing. Having said this:

You can buy a second hand camera with a few lenses here for €200 odd and you can get a telephoto lens here, which seems to be free but I would imagine he is looking for €120 odd, which will allow you to take shots from 40-50 metres away.

Now the disclaimer! The camera is fairly old but it will take 3 shots a second for you. The lens also isn't the best but it's the cheapest telezoom you can buy. Also you will be getting a few other lenses with the camera which will allow you to take shots of presentations and family outings etc as they aren't telezooms and are more day to day lenses and for €320 odd you are not going to do any better anywhere.

You can spend €4K on a camera and €7K on a single lens so you will have to understand that the results you get will not be spectacular but with a little research into how the camera and lens work together you should be able to get perfectly good results with the camera and lens mentioned above.

Best of luck!

Just from experience I wouldn't recommend the 300D the four frame buffer is useless and unless you're at 1/4000 shutter speed it's more 2fps..

Although if his budget will only cover that then it will do,But OP will find himself needing an upgrade soon after

sikahunter

argos are doin some nice deals at the moment. mrboswel how much u sellin the tamron for pm if u like

Ballyman

And here is the Nikon version of what you need. This is probably equivalent to the Canon 400D and similar lenses.
€400 would be a good price for this gear.

guym

Thanks for the quick replies!! as for budget, wouldn't really want to be spending more than 250-300. Lens wise, don't think I'd need anything spectacular as I can usually get quite close to the action. The main concern was having the ability to take a number of frames per sec. I have a great ability for pressing the shoot button either too early or too late and missing the good shots. I thought if I had a camera that could shoot 3-4 per sec I might be able to get a few good shots!!

Thanks again!!

Ballyman

guym wrote: »

The main concern was having the ability to take a number of frames per sec. I have a great ability for pressing the shoot button either too early or too late and missing the good shots. I thought if I had a camera that could shoot 3-4 per sec I might be able to get a few good shots!!

The prob here with your current compact digital is that there is a severe delay between the time you press the button the and time the shot is taken.
You prob don't even need a camera that can take 3-4 shots a second as it's all in the timing.
With dSLR's in general, the moment you press the shutter button the shot is taken. There is no delay really. You are only talking miliseconds of a delay so if you get the timing right then you will only need 1 per second

Ideally what you are looking for is a zoom lens to 200 or 300mm. There are loads of them available and the cheapest are the Sigma and Tamron versions.

Any of the basic model dSLR's from all the major manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Pentax etc.) will do perfectly with the lens above.

To be honest though, you'll be doing well to pick up a camera on it's own, never mind a lens as well for under the €250 mark.

If you can stretch to €400 then the link to the Nikon stuff above would be ideal for you.

Ricky91t

Would that sigma 70-300 work on the Nikon D40 that's my only issue with recommending them as you could end up trying to MF for sports which wouldn't be nice

Ballyman

The Nikon version of the Sigma 70-300 has an internal motor to allow it to work with D40 and D40x bodies.

uprising

Does it have to be a digital camera?, you can get a canon eos 5 film camera, 5 frames per sec, more megapixles, for about 100 quid or so, get a half decent lens and flash for it, 200-250 total incl camera on ebay or so, get used to it, shoot film, if your brave enough shoot fuji velvia slide film, get it right with velvia, even by fluke and you'll have a pic like no other.
on the down side more expensive, 36 pics per roll, dont know if you got a decent pic until its developed, but i'd definately consider it if i were you

guym

uprising wrote: »

Does it have to be a digital camera?, you can get a canon eos 5 film camera, 5 frames per sec, more megapixles, for about 100 quid or so, get a half decent lens and flash for it, 200-250 total incl camera on ebay or so, get used to it, shoot film, if your brave enough shoot fuji velvia slide film, get it right with velvia, even by fluke and you'll have a pic like no other.
on the down side more expensive, 36 pics per roll, dont know if you got a decent pic until its developed, but i'd definately consider it if i were you

Definately want to go digital, just want the simplest and most cost effective way of getting a few half decent shots. Might save a few more pennies and keep my yes on the second hand section in adverts.
Thanks

Cabaal

guym wrote: »

Definately want to go digital, just want the simplest and most cost effective way of getting a few half decent shots. Might save a few more pennies and keep my yes on the second hand section in adverts.
Thanks

Agreed, while film is nice and all if you take into account developing/film costs in the long run digital will work out the best value

Cabaal

I'#d recommend the likes of 400D if your on a budget, you should get it pretty cheap these days