camera help

[Hemjr]

I realize this does not directly relate to PTexe, but I do a lot of shows using PTexe and visit the forum often. I know some of you photography experts can give some help on this.

I have been procrastinating on purchasing a new digital camera(SLR) for some time now.

My past experience was with a Minolta 35mm camera and various lens. More recently with the Sony Mavica, Canon digital Elph powershot 400 and now the Nikon Coolpix 8800. Our son and grandchildren have just moved back to South Carolina from northern California. This permits us to attend some of their sports events. They are currently playing volleyball in the basketbal gymnasium. I prefer to use available light for indoor shots, especially for sports events. The coolpix does OK for outside shots but just will not do the job inside using available light.

Do any current digital SLR's in the under $2000 range meet these requirements?

I know there are probably as many answers to this question as there are people out there, but primarily need a camera and lens combination that will permit indoor photography under extreme lighting conditions usiing telephoto lens. Am I asking too much?

I failed to mention, the Coolpix 8800 does gather enough light it is just that if there is ANY movement the lens is not fast enough to stop the action.

Thanks,

Howard

[Lin Evans]

Absolutely! The new Sony Alpha 700 will work with Minolta lenses, has 12 megapixel resolution, incredible high ISO performance and is within your price budget. The Alpha 700 is presently available only through Sony stores but will be at all stores in November. It's a dynamite dSLR, perhaps one of the very best available - I'm buying one myself and I have over 30 digital cameras including Nikon (D2Xs), Canon (D30, 10D, 1D, 1DS, 1D Mark II), Kodak (DCS-760), and Sigma (SD10, SD14) dSLR's. This new Sony is a winner in every way and will be an excellent camera for your grandchildren's sports and for low light photography.

Best regards,

Lin

I realize this does not directly relate to PTexe, but I do a lot of shows using PTexe and visit the forum often. I know some of you photography experts can give some help on this.

I have been procrastinating on purchasing a new digital camera(SLR) for some time now.

My past experience was with a Minolta 35mm camera and various lens. More recently with the Sony Mavica, Canon digital Elph powershot 400 and now the Nikon Coolpix 8800. Our son and grandchildren have just moved back to South Carolina from northern California. This permits us to attend some of their sports events. They are currently playing volleyball in the basketbal gymnasium. I prefer to use available light for indoor shots, especially for sports events. The coolpix does OK for outside shots but just will not do the job inside using available light.

Do any current digital SLR's in the under $2000 range meet these requirements?

I know there are probably as many answers to this question as there are people out there, but primarily need a camera and lens combination that will permit indoor photography under extreme lighting conditions usiing telephoto lens. Am I asking too much?

I failed to mention, the Coolpix 8800 does gather enough light it is just that if there is ANY movement the lens is not fast enough to stop the action.

Thanks,

Howard

[Hemjr]

Lin,

Thanks so much for your reply. I have looked at some of the reviews on the Sony Alpha 700. It does look like an improvement over some of the other cameras I have been looking at. I don't know if any of my Minolta lens' will work though because they are the old type of lens. I understand that Minolta made a change in the lens' design that prevents the lens from fittting the newer cameras. Whoever gave me that information may be wrong though.

If I have to purchase a lens, what would you recommend for the type of shots I mentioned in my first posting?

I would want one that is fast enough to do the available light shots and to be able to stop movement. The lens may end up being as costly as the camera.

Thanks for your help,

Howard

[bmccammon]

As a wedding photographer I get my share of indoor, low light photography challenges. I'm a Nikon shooter and don't know the options out there for the Sony camera that you and Lin are discussing but in general I think you'll be very pleased with a moderate zoom lens in the 70-200 mm range IF it is an f/2.8 lens. I use ours to shoot wrestling, soccer, and lacrosse when my grandson is enrolled.

I suppose that with high ISO you can rely on an f/4 or f/5.6 lens but the f/2.8 has been a work horse for me for several years. It is extremely versatile. If you can manage the money adding IS (Canon) or VR (Nikon) will aid in low light captures. If the Sony camera offers any lenses with image stabilization you should give serious attention to that option. Good luck with your purchase. You'll certainly enjoy the new camera and all the opportunities that the kids/grandkids bring you.

Best regards,

Bruce

[Lin Evans]

Hi Howard,

I can't say either whether older Minolta lenses will or won't work with the Sony. Your best bet would be to ask on a forum like dPReview:

http://www.dpreview.com

As for lenses - for best results a fast 2.8 as suggested would be great and a range such as 70-200 along with a 1.4x tele converter might be ideal but no doubt expensive. Because Minolta lenses are very expensive, if price is a major consideration I would have a long look at perhaps the Sigma 70-300 F3.5-5.6 APO which is not an expensive lens but works "very" well according to all reports with the Sony Alpha 700. While a stabilized lens is wonderful for shooting subjects which are still or relatively still, for fast sports, etc., it's not such an advantage as a faster lens, but because of the excellent high ISO capabilities of the cameras I think you can depend on decent shots even with a 5.6. Because of the 1.5x crop your field of view at full 300mm will be as a 450mm with full sampling resolution so other than depth of field and other optical characteristics of a true 300mm optical focal length, you will essentially get the effective magnification of a 450mm lens on a full 35mm platform sensor.

If you find that the Minolta lenses which you have won't work with the Sony Alpha, then also look at the Canon 40D which is a wonderful 10 megapixel camera. It doesn't have the stabilized body, but there is a large assortment of stabilized lenses available for it and it has perhaps even better high ISO performance than the Sony.

Of course the real cat's meow, will be the Nikon D300 coming in November which with a battery pack/vertical grip added will shoot at 9 frames per second at 12 megapixels. It's a dandy with incredible autofocus and such. Of course it will cost about $1800 U.S. dollars for the body but there are now a pretty good assortment of VR (vibration reduction - Nikon's name for stabilized lenses) lense for it. The high ISO performance on it "should" be even better than either Sony or Canon.

Going completely wild would be the new Nikon full frame D3 which will have incredible high ISO (up to ISO 25,600 but this body due out in November is $5000 but worth every penny.

My suggestion for the Sony was predicated on the potential for using your Minolta lenses, but if you can't use them (ask on dPReview Sony dSLR forum) then there are certainly more choices even to include the Olympus e510 which is by all reports a dandy little dSLR.

Best regards,

Lin

Lin,

Thanks so much for your reply. I have looked at some of the reviews on the Sony Alpha 700. It does look like an improvement over some of the other cameras I have been looking at. I don't know if any of my Minolta lens' will work though because they are the old type of lens. I understand that Minolta made a change in the lens' design that prevents the lens from fittting the newer cameras. Whoever gave me that information may be wrong though.

If I have to purchase a lens, what would you recommend for the type of shots I mentioned in my first posting?

I would want one that is fast enough to do the available light shots and to be able to stop movement. The lens may end up being as costly as the camera.

Thanks for your help,

Howard

[jfa]

I know there are probably as many answers to this question as there are people out there, but primarily need a camera and lens combination that will permit indoor photography under extreme lighting conditions using telephoto lens. Am I asking too much?

Not at all Howard. Most, (if not all), digital SLRs will do a fine job so the first point I usually make when asked this by someone moving to digital SLRs is, what brand of lenses do you have? If you have invested a considerable sum in lenses it is best to purchase a SLR that is compatible with them. I understand from your posts this is not a consideration for you.

I have photographed motorcycle racing, (motocross, desert racing), other forms of motor-sport and tennis with a range of digital SLR models and brands, (Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Pentax and Sony), in your price range and all have produced good results.

....<snip>...They are currently playing volleyball in the basketbal gymnasium. I prefer to use available light for indoor shots, especially for sports events. The coolpix does OK for outside shots but just will not do the job inside using available light.

My granddaughter is currently playing in the state level basketball competition and I have photographed her and the team successfully many times. The secret I think is in the lens. Image Stabilising is a must-have in this situation. Using 400-800 ISO "freezing" the action with very little noise is not a problem with my Canon 20D, 350D and the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens. This is a marvellous lens, fast with f2.8, sharp and gives very good colour rendition. I have just obtained a Canon 40D which is a truly wonderful camera. Although not applicable for sport I have hand held down to 1/8th of a second successfully many time with a sharp, well exposed result due to the IS of the EF 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Just check the SLR has continuous focus, (most modern ones do now), as I have found this to be very useful in taking action photography.

Do any current digital SLR's in the under $2000 range meet these requirements?

Yes, most will with the right lens.

Good luck.

[Guest Techman1]

Howard,

I have had excellent results using Canon (but Nikon is also extremely good) with sports photography inside. As mentioned, a 70-200mm 2.8 lens would work great as long as you can use an ISO of around 800 (maybe more depending on the gym's lighting). The IS mentioned, isn't really for Sports but is great for more static images (some may disagree).

If you'd like to see some volleyball or basketball images with this setup, send me a PM and I'll send you a link.

Good luck with your decision.

All the best,

Fred

p.s. - You can certainly get a great setup within your budget. Take care!

[Hemjr]

Thanks to all for your replies. I waited untill the Nikon D300's were released and now have mine in hand.

I purchasd a used Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG Macro AF lens. It does not have VR. I have noticed that the zoom ring is kind of stiff to turn. Does anyone know if this is normal?

Also am looking at a new Nikon AFS VR 70-200mm F2.8 IF ED LENS 70-200. It is very expensive for me. I am also looking at a used Nikon f2.8 ED AF Macro-Zoom 80-200 lens at less than half the price, but it is not VR. How important is VR?

Does anyone have any wisdom on this to share? I will be purchasing the long zoom for indoor sport photograhy as a hobby.

Fred, you offered to send me a link to your site with volleyball pics. Thanks, I would appreciate it.

Thanks again,

Howard

[bmccammon]

IS or VR won't help at all for subject motion. Higher shutter speeds - meaning higher ISO - are key to stopping subject movement. If you are hand holding the camera (no monopod or tripod) then VR/IS will definitely help reduce blur caused by camera movement. The Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens is consistently rated at or near the top of lenses in that class. Mine is an absolute workhorse and is used extensively in almost every shoot I do. It is worth the money. Congratulations on the D300 purchase.

Best regards,

Bruce