Rank beginner ???'s

Hello Everyone

After going to this years Rolex 24 car race and lookng thru someones nice Nikon with 300mm lens on it i realized just how much i was missing. This has since sent me on a mission to become more educated about my photography. Speaking with my wife we have decided to set a limit of $1200 on a new camera and starter lens.
I realize i will have no clue what a camera of this level will be capable of but would like to have room to grow into it as I learn and take some photo classes. I was thinking of a camera with a 18-110mm lens for the main lens and then adding a 55mm to 300mm as a second lens. Am I going in the right direction??
Our main shooting arenas will be outdoor photography and motorsports. Also are there any good beginner reads to unravel some of the mysteries of photography that you could recommend.

Thanks
Jeff

First realize that you will be commtting to a lens line when you pick a camera. Get the best camera you can afford, then decide on lenses, and pick them up as you can, when you can.

"Best camera" may not mean megapixels, but it may mean frames per second (especially for motorsports) or lower noise, faster autofocus, or even just feels better in your hands. When I went digital I chose Nikon for two reasons. I had access to a very good deal on some used stuff from a friend who was upgrading, and I like the fact that Nikons still mount the F-mount lenses they've had for decades. An old lens you find somewhere may not auto-focus, or may not even auto-expose, but it will mount on the camera! (That said, it hasn't actually been the case, yet. I've come close to pulling the trigger on a couple of older deals, but not yet.)

Feature sets between similarly priced cameras from competing manufacturers are, amazingly enough, quite similar. You look at them, say I like this, I don't care for that, whatever, and decide. Then you look at lenses.

I'm not sure about an 18-110, but that's not because I've had bad experiences, it's because I've had no experiences. I'm still using the kit lenses that came with my first dSLR, an 18-55 and a 55-200, and I've added Nikon's very nice 70-300 VR this past fall. I upgraded from that used camera to a better (but still used) camera last summer, so by watching eBay, there are deals to be had. My first deal was a D50 with those 2 lenses and an SB-600 flash, $400 all told. I found a D5000 last June on eBay and bought it, and eBayed my D50 to get the upgrade for less than 200 bucks difference! Happy me!

You mentioned motorsports, and that is some of my favorite shooting. I also do a number of air shows. Just for me, nothing professional or to sell. I almost never use the short lens on anything moving. I'll use it on static displays at an air show, or as I walk through the paddock at a race track. "Real" shooting is with the longer lenses. That may be why I'm not excited about your 18-110 suggestion. If I'm mounting the short glass, I don't need to go to 110, and if I need long glass, 110 isn't far enough.

BTW, going to Sebring???? :)

For me $1200 wouldn't even buy a lens, or a body.
You will have to make some trade offs with that budget, but it is a start.

The most expensive things will be the lenses, and they'll be the things you keep even after upgrading the body.
You are buying into a system, whether it is Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus you will eventually become locked in with the high price of the lenses to fit the camera. Even if you buy Tamron or Sigma lenses for Canon they won't fit another manufacturer's body.

Your zoom lenses look as if they will be small aperture, and with a wide zoom range the quality won't be as good as the pro lenses. Your 300mm zoom won't be as good as a 300mm prime but that is to be expected hwen even a second hand prime is 3x your total budget.

So yes, the compromises you're making are pretty much what I did when I started.
Your wide range zooms are likely to be f/5.6 and probably best used at f/8 so I am glad you're looking at outdoor sports not indoors.

I'm not sure where you're going to manage to do it, but the best way to pick the camera is to get it in your hands and try it. It may not eventually be where you buy it as an online store may be cheaper, but getting hands on is important.
I decided that the Nikon fitted my hand well, but the menu system and controls didn't seem as good as the Canon. Sony wasn't an alternative back then, but I've handled them and found the ergonomics are great.

At the same price point the different manufacturers' bodies are fairly comparable, there won't be much difference. You'll have to look carefully at the specs to see if there is a feature you want that tips the balance.

If you don't mind used cameras you could pick up a nice used E3 which is a pro body and a times 2 crop factor. A used 50-200mm which would really be 100-400mm giving you plenty of reach and speed. But the Olympus series DSLRs at present have a uncertain future. Then later on a used E5.
You would be in that budget range.

Thanks for the replys everyone. I can tell you right now my wife would never see eye to eye about spending a few thousand dollars on 1 lens:D.

Lets be clear I have no desire to sell photos so i dont need to be that far up the food chain on lenses . Even though i may want to be. I am tending towards Nikon at this point due to the ability to use the older lenses if needed. I'm unshure on buying a used body at this point but would be open to it .
As far as online or camera store i am open to both but prefer a brick and mortar store. I like to have the personal interaction. Price may make the ultimate decison but the wife and I are big on supporting local business if they are relatively close and within reason on pricing.

one thing that really got this started was my cousin and me coming up with all kinds of shooting scenarios while at the track . We realized just how much fun we could be having with a good camera at the events.

"BTW, going to Sebring???? "

Not this year maybe someday. I have run sebring in my miata at some hpde trackdays. For some reason Sebring doesnt translate well to me on the tv. Driving it gave me a whole different respect for the track and the skills required to get a good lap time:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f86sabjf

Thanks for the replys everyone. I can tell you right now my wife would never see eye to eye about spending a few thousand dollars on 1 lens:D.

Lets be clear I have no desire to sell photos so i dont need to be that far up the food chain on lenses . Even though i may want to be. I am tending towards Nikon at this point due to the ability to use the older lenses if needed. I'm unshure on buying a used body at this point but would be open to it .
As far as online or camera store i am open to both but prefer a brick and mortar store. I like to have the personal interaction. Price may make the ultimate decison but the wife and I are big on supporting local business if they are relatively close and within reason on pricing.

one thing that really got this started was my cousin and me coming up with all kinds of shooting scenarios while at the track . We realized just how much fun we could be having with a good camera at the events.

---

All brands are able to use 'old' lenses to some degree with Nikon being mid-pack. Pentax will directly mount most everything they ever used and Sony would be the leader with full functionality from 25 year old Minolta lenses. - Terry

Im not pro but wfooshee is right as well as smartwombat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f86sabjf

For some reason Sebring doesnt translate well to me on the tv. Driving it gave me a whole different respect for the track and the skills required to get a good lap time:D

---

I find the same at Spa Francorchamps, the TV coverage rarely shows a whole lap, and they manage to make EauRouge not look intimidating.
Anyhow the track's not the same since they emasculated the bus stop chicane and put in the new pit entry.

Quote:

---

find the same at Spa Francorchamps, the TV coverage rarely shows a whole lap, and they manage to make EauRouge not look intimidating.
Anyhow the track's not the same since they emasculated the bus stop chicane and put in the new pit entry.

---

i want to know too !

:rolleyes:

[IMG]http://www.**********/g.gif[/IMG]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

If you don't mind used cameras you could pick up a nice used E3 which is a pro body and a times 2 crop factor. A used 50-200mm which would really be 100-400mm giving you plenty of reach and speed. But the Olympus series DSLRs at present have a uncertain future. Then later on a used E5.
You would be in that budget range.

---

I saw someone selling on a local craigslists but im not sure on whether to buy it or not. Its 2 months old. What should I look into it to identify if its still on a good condition.

For what you are looking for, get a Nikon D5100 with a starter kit lens and go from there. Get familiar with your camera and then later decide on your second lens, which will not have to cost a fortune.
Good luck.

Thanks for the recommendation within the nikon family

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoguePix

I saw someone selling on a local craigslists but im not sure on whether to buy it or not. Its 2 months old. What should I look into it to identify if its still on a good condition.

---

You could ask what the shutter count is. If its from a studio it's probably got a high count. From an individual probably not.

if anyone could look at and compare the nikon 5100 to the nikon D90 I would appreciate it. The reason i am asking is because like it says at the top of the post I am a rank begginer and dont quite understand all the jargon yet . Is the price difference between the two worth it ??

My own preference between those two would be the 5100. The D90 has the motor and drive for older AF lenses (the ones that do not have the built-in motor) so that could be a factor if you have such lenses. The D5100 requires AF-S lenses for auto-focus, although the other lenses will mount OK, you'd have to focus manually. The D90 has a very slightly faster shooting rate, and the D5100 has a very slightly higher pixel count and a wider ISO range (shoot in darker or brighter conditions) and coming from a D5000 myself, I can tell you that that LCD that swivels is a lot handier than you'd expect.

D5100 has the same sensor than the D7000
a 70-300 VR zoom is very sharp when there is enough light

neither is the best for sports , but with good light it'll be enough, or so I think , I have not used it personally

I would go with the D5100, there is a nice article about why to buy the D5100 instead of the D7000 written by photojohn

if your old lenses are autofocus, the AF will not work

Edit link to the article http://reviews.photographyreview.com...e-1-stereo-mic

I have no lenses at all now . So this is all from a fresh start. Our current camera is a 7yr old kodak easyshare 5mp so no real help there. So within the Nikon line and my budget $1200 what would be the best for outdoor shots and motorsports stuff??? If not the 5100 then what ???

You ought to be able to get the D5100 and at least one lens for that. I have the 2 kit lenses that came with my D50 years ago, and 18-55 and a 55-200. Neither has the VR feature of some newer lenses, and I was quite happy at Sebring last year with the 55-200. (That said, I'll have my 70-300 VR out there this year!)

I'd think you could get a pair of lenses like that to start out with, and stay in budget. If you had a choose one lens, get the longer one for your motosports work. Save up and get the short one so you can shoot in the paddock and garages.

My brother had a Kodak Easyshare, and hated it from the day he got it. Bought on the specs, and found that the specs don't mean much under real light. Don't know which one, exactly, and it's not fair to run the whole line into the ground for one camera, but there you have it. :)

well i guess the 5100 gets the vote then :thumbsup:. I'll just buy the best lenses i can afford and maybe in a few years upgrade the body if need be.

On a side note from the reading i've been doing i should probably get a 32gb spd class 10 card for it so i have enough room for a weekend or would a 64gb be better??. I don't plan on using the video mode at all .

Again a million Thanks to all for there patienece as I'm sure i'm not the first down this road of questioning:D

Good decision, you won't regret. Do your homework on additional lenses before you buy.
I doubt that you would fill either card on a weekend.

about the sd cards, I get a bit anxious using a very large card, if it fails I may lose many many shots

I rather use multiple smaller cards, specially if traveling and I don' have the opportunity to do backups

And congrats on the 5100, you are going to love it

I did a similar transition , from a kodak eayshare to a d40 ( with much less technical capabilities than the D5100) and I was ecstatic

my kodak was 8mp but I always used it a 1mp to save memory space :)

use your new camera often ...
and also use the PR community, I have learned a lot here

As for cards, last year at Sebring I was using my D50, hadn't gotten the D5000 yet, and it couldn't use the SDHC cards so was limited to 2 Gb at a time, I had 2 of those plus a 1Gb, and twice during the weekend I dumped the cards onto the laptop to clear them off. I shot 11 or 12 hundred frames over the weekend. That was at 6 megapixels, of course shooting at 12 with my D5000 would make a difference.
I think you'd be fine with 2 or 3 16-Gb cards, again with the thought of not keeping all your eggs in one basket.

hmmm all my eggs not in one basket that does make a bunch of sense