So confused

[Chaser]

This is driving me crazy! I went and checked out some cameras and like the way Canon and Nikon felt. Now I'm still not sure of whice one. I looked at the EOS 450D, EOS 40D, and then Nikon 60D and 80D. LOL All I want it a good camera to take kids sports and when we go to nascar races. The sports will be outside sports. I know there are other models for starters but I want one that I can use now and grow into. I don't have the cash to buy a new one in a year or two. And for the lens, I guess I will use the one it comes with till I get the hang of it! I know I've been bugging y'all with all these question, but thanks for anwsering them. Any input will be great, there is to many thing to pick and it drives me nuts to think I may spend all that cash on one and it won't be the right one for the things I want it for!
Thanks

[Chaser]

Oh, is it true the starter lens in the kits aren't very good and are a waste of money?
If thats so, I should just get the body and buy a better lens ?

[Frog]

Don't know about the canon starter but I've heard good things about the 18-55vr with the Nikon.
Which starter lenses are you looking at?

[drg]

Chaser,

Is this your first DSLR?
Do you have prior experience with photography beyond a simple or basic camera? This includes film cameras too.

Is your budget fixed around a particular camera range or do you have a maximum total? Consider you will need some memory cards, a case/bag to protect the camera, probably should buy an extra battery (for travel or 'big' events or damage/loss), a Circular Polarizer ($30-50 to get started), a blower (Giotto's Rocket), a good lens cloth, and a few other odds and ends which all told will add $150-200 to you costs.

Then, once you have settled on how much to spend, And trust me, this is a good idea or you will drop twice what you thought you would to start out then comes a couple more decisions.

Do you have enough computer? Storage needs for these modern cameras means you should initially plan on adding a hard drive (250Gb probably or 500Gb are just about as cheap). $100+

Software to handle the photography initially can be handled usually by what is included with the camera. You will probably want to upgrade or change to something else before long.

I am not ignoring your question about which camera, I just believe that unless you want to be frustrated quickly you need to take into account all the major topics. Camera stores once upon time were helpful but there are less and less who do much more than sell stuff. Particularly digital because of the information available on the Internet.

If you experience level isn't great, I would strongly suggest either of the entry cameras (Canon 450D or the Nikon D50/D60). Consider features and read reviews of the basic lens that come with the cameras.

I certainly would think about looking at a body alone, and adding the lens of your choice. It might be a $100 saved so you aren't quickly replacing a lens.

[Chaser]

Oh sorry I posted all that info in the wrong room so here i go, looking to spend no more then 1000.00. As for the experience only mommy shots. I just want one that will do good at baseball, soccer and races. I hate to waste money on one only to need to upgrade a few months later. Thanks

[EOSThree]

Just about any body will allow you to shoot what you want to. The reason I say that, is that any DSLR will be somewhat of an improvement over a point and shoot camera. That's a bit of a tight budget for what you want to shoot. I am familiar with Canon so I would look at either an Xti(400D) or a refurb. 30D. The 30D is better ergonomically, you can probably get a 400D new still. I currently own 2 refurbished bodies: a 5D and a 30D, I have had no problems with either. The reason I am looking at older bodies is your budget doesn't allow a lot of room for good lenses. If you step back on the body, and use the difference to buy better lenses, you'll be far ahead of the latest body with mediocre lenses.

You probably will want a wide to mid range zoom lens for general photography. The new kit lens 18-55 IS is a decent lens. You will probably also want some length on your lenses to shoot sports. The Canon 70-200 f/4 L is a very sharp lens, not horribly expensive and will do an excellent job in good light. The 70-200 is one of Canon's top lenses. The combination of the new 18-55 IS and the 55-250 IS would be a decent combo. The Canon 70-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS is a good lens and offers the most length.

All of these suggestions will put you over your $1K budget, but like DRG said you have to look at the whole picture(no pun intended), there is a lot more to this than a camera body, and a good lens is certainly a huge consideration.

[Chaser]

1st sorry if I'm repeating. So I can get a less pricey body and buy really good lens and that will be like having on of those high end cameras? If so and I go that way 30D will be a good one to start with?
Thanks again

[Photo-John]

So I can get a less pricey body and buy really good lens and that will be like having on of those high end cameras

Not quite - or there would be no reason to buy a pro digital SLR

But most people will be better off investing in a less expensive camera body and a really good lens. I wouldn't recommend the EOS 30D, though. I'd buy either the Canon EOS Rebel XTi or XSi over the 30D. The 30D will give you a faster frame rate. But both the XTi and the XSi will have better image quality. I've shot tons of sports with both and they work great, as long as you can live with not being able to shoot 5 frames-per-second. And for the most part, that's overkill. I'd rather have better low light shooting capability.

[EOSThree]

It will not be like having one of those high end cameras. But, the body has one of the smaller roles in image quality: better lenses on an older body will blow away a crappy lens on a newer body. IMO the lens is far more important than the body is and all of the modern digital camera bodies are capable of fantastic results.

Look in my gallery, I am not saying I am that great of a photographer, just demonstrating the IQ you can expect from good glass on older bodies. Most of my gallery is taken with a G2 or 10D. Some with an S2, Some with a Rebel XT, and some with a 5D. All of which are not the latest greatest. The glass is old too, but some of the best available from Canon.

Remember the 30D was a high-end camera(well mid end)just two years ago. It was only replaced with the 40D about a year ago. It is still a very capable camera and will render excellent photographs.

A newer body, such as the Xsi, or 40D has some advantages:

-More megapixels (before I get hanged, I will qualify this statement: More MP is generally regarded as a "better" thing. It isn't necessarily a better thing, first more photo sites (pixels) crammed onto a sensor of a given size requires those photo sites to get smaller to fit, this increases noise, and decreases the amount of detail each photo site can hold.)

-Digic III processor. This is a fast processor than the Digic II processor. One of it's jobs is to help combat the noise created by the more saturated sensor.

-Slightly higher fps. Faster shooting, larger buffer. This can be helpful, but in my experience, except in certain situations, this just means burning up more space on your card.

There are also other differences, each may or may not be useful to you. DPreview has very in depth reviews of all of the cameras I mentioned. Read up on the features and decide which will be useful to you.

[Chaser]

Thank you, I just wish it was as easy as someone saying get this one!

[Photo-John]

Thank you, I just wish it was as easy as someone saying get this one!

If you want Canon, get the XTi. I think that's your best cost-to-performance buy

[EOSThree]

If you want Canon, get the XTi. I think that's your best cost-to-performance buy

I agree with PJ here, even though I recently just sold my Rebel XT and purchased a 30D. With already owning a 5D IMO the 30D was the perfect companion to it. The controls and menus are laid out almost identically. I frequently found myself fumbling and having to look for things on the XT, but only because of the bodies I had owned before it. I had owned 2 EOS film bodies, and started with a 10D for digital, all of these bodies work in a similar manner. The XT Xti and Xsi have a slightly different interface, if you start with an Xti, you'll never know the difference.

Go buy the Xti and some good glass and have a ball keeping up with your kids.

[Chaser]

Thanks 1 last question ok maybe 2
You said get Xti, I have read the Xsi is better, now is that just to the "trained eye" or is it for all? And #2 what lens should I start with?
Thanks

[EOSThree]

Thanks 1 last question ok maybe 2
You said get Xti, I have read the Xsi is better, now is that just to the "trained eye" or is it for all? And #2 what lens should I start with?
Thanks

The Xsi is newer, and maybe it has some features the Xti doesn't have, and yes it does have a higher MP count, but is it better? It certainly isn't better if you compromise your lens choices because you spent extra to get the Xsi.

I disagree with PJ the the IQ that the Xti or Xsi is going to be better than the IQ on a 30D. I would be so bold as to say you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between a photo taken with my semi retired ancient 10D and an Xti, Xsi, or 40D at the resolutions and sizes most people print at. The Xti will have more information than the 30d and the Xsi will have more information than the Xti. My 10D with less resolution that all of them will easily print at 8.5 x 11" and if you plan on printing larger than this get the body with the most MP you can, but keep in mind the noise this introduces to the final output.

The reason we both said get the Xti is your budget. At $1000 an Xti will cost around $550, this is a little more than half your budget. This leaves only $450 for lenses, this is a tight budget. The majority of you budget should be spent on your lenses. I know Canon lenses and if I were using your budget I would start with the 18-55 IS(image stabilized) it sells for about $180. For sports you'll need something longer, the 55-250 is the compliment lens to the 18-55 and sells for about $280. That puts you $10 over your budget, those are OK lenses, nothing spectacular.

[Photo-John]

My 10D with less resolution that all of them will easily print at 8.5 x 11" and if you plan on printing larger than this get the body with the most MP you can, but keep in mind the noise this introduces to the final output.

I had a 10D and upgraded to the XTi. By the time I replaced the 10D, I hated that camera. The AF failed me constantly and I couldn't shoot over IS 200 with it. The XTi is a far better camera in every way except the build and the controls. And those changes were a small price to pay to get better high ISO performance, more resolution, and better auto focus. I have a 40D now - but only because I need the faster frame rate. If I could get 5 FPS from the XTi, I'd have a couple XTis, instead.

Although it's true that increasing resolution also increases noise, you're leaving out improved noise reduction technology. That's one area where camera manufacturers are making great leaps. The XTi and XSi, even though they have more pixels, also have less noise than the EOS 30D. Furthermore, the increased resolution effectively minimizes the noise that is there by making the pixels relatively smaller.

[Chaser]

For sports you'll need something longer, the 55-250 is the compliment lens to the 18-55 and sells for about $280.

If I was going to spend alittle bit more on a better one could you give me a name. As I see it if I'm spending the $$ I want a good one.
Thanks again y'all have helped me so much!

[EOSThree]

The two lenses I mention above have very good optics(good image quality)but fall short in build quality. They will serve you fine if you are careful with them. Better long lenses would be: 70-300 IS $530, or the 70-200 f/4 $600. The 70-200 is a gem, great contrast, great color and solid build, it's not as long as the other choices though and lacks IS. It does come in an IS version but that's even more $$.

[Photo-John]

I'll co-sign on the 70-200 f/4L. Probably one of the best lenses ever made. Auto focus is super fast and accurate and the build quality is excellent. I recommend a 70-200mm lens to all serious sports photographers.

For an alternative, check out the new Tamron AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD Macro zoom. The build won't be as nice as the Canon. But I think Tamron makes great lenses and I just read a review of this lens in Pop Photography and they said it actually has less distortion than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L. B&H has it listed for $699, just a bit more than the Canon. Closer focusing distance, faster maximum aperture, and better image quality? I think that makes the Tamron my first choice. In fact, I'm kinda tempted, myself...

[Frog]

Of course we expect you to post pictures and reviews and remain an active member forever.
PJ will you cosign for lenses for me too?

[Chaser]

The build won't be as nice as the Canon

Sorry , but what do you mean by "build"?

[byjamesderuvoDHQ]

Chaser. I think it's important here to focus on the fact that you're not just buying a camera, but a system. Bodies will come and go, but the lenses are actually the part of the camera that you'll use from camera body to camera body. So, if you pay a little less for the body in order to get a faster lens, then that's more logical than going cheap on the lens to get a more advanced body. On the other hand, the quality of third party lenses has gotten so much better the last few years, than you can actually have the best of both worlds and save money all the way around. SIGMA lenses are getting great reviews of late as are Tamron's line. So, you could actually go with a solid second tier lens like Sigma and spend for a faster lens.

Looking at your choices, it's no wonder you're uncertain what to do, they're both GREAT camera lines. Frankly, I think you'll be happy with either the Canon or the Nikon. However, IIRC, the D80 is slower than the D60 and the 60 I believe has a full frame shutter.

If you have lenses from a previous Nikon or Canon, that could also come into play, Any Canon EF lens can be used with the Digital Rebel.

Hope that helps, and good luck.

James DeRuvo
DigitalCamera-HQ.

[EOSThree]

Sorry , but what do you mean by "build"?

How well it's built. IE more plastics, maybe some barrel wobble, may not focus as quickly due to a lesser focus motor, the zoom and or focus rings may be tight/loose/not smooth in action, etc.

[hollis]

I recently bought the XSi & for $700 I don't think it can be beat.

When we refer to "build" some people knock the amount of plastic
used by Canon. Some companies use metal frames for their cameras & lenses.
I'm not hard on equipment, so I think you'll take more pictures
if your camera isn't a pain to carry all day long.
My other camera, a Pentax K10, feels like a boat anchor next to the XSi.
So do you need a more robust camera, like the Pros?

3.5 frames per second is fast enough to do something most Nascar guys cant...
thats catch kyle Busch dead in his tracks
The Optical Image Stabilization works great too.
3" LCD means no squinting to see if you got the pic or not! :thumbsup:

Get the XSi & if you have $1000 to spend, pick up the 55-250mm IS lens too.
I think that would make a great starter kit.

You should be more than happy and if the Photo Bug bites hard...
you can always buy professional grade lenses ($1000-$7000)

1st link is the XSi & the 18-55mm IS lens for $689
(I order online to avoid sales tax...I'm cheap that way)

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.a...u=CNDRXSIK1855

2nd link is the 55-250mm IS lens @ $265

http://www.jr.com/canon/pe/CAN_EFS55...*A#productTabs

Good Luck