Have lots of questions and need advice

[shadwlight]

I am thinking of getting a SLR. I currently own a point and shoot Nikon. My sons play football and I really want to get a camera to capture those plays. I am looking for something in the 600.00 price range. I have been looking at the Nikon D300 I know somene that owns it as well and it does do great action shot. I also want to get some of those special moment pictures my current point and shoot just doesnt seem to capture. What would be a good SLR that would be easy to use and on my price range.

I also want to be able to get shots like this http://www.fordfamilyphotography.com/ Is this something that a camera in my price range would be able to do? Are these types of photos Photoshopped or can a camera really do that? Also what is the best type of photoshop program to get ?

I have been trying to do research online but everyone says so many diffrent things and photgraphers dont want to share there secrets but I am truley doing this for a hobby as I am in school to become a RN. Thank you for any and all help you might be able to give a lost sole.

[Loupey]

I don't know Nikon equipment but don't fret too much about the camera. More thought (and money) should be put towards the lens.

And even more thought and energy towards learning photographic techniques.

So, in other words, the camera itself is not as large a piece of the puzzle as one might think. For sports though, a high frame rate and good autofocus would be important I do believe.

[Anbesol]

The D300 is a damned fine camera, but its not $600. Unless you mean the D3000.

For sports you'll want something in the 200-300mm range, preferably f/4 or faster (but cant do that on your $600 budget). For a body look at the used higher end models, which have faster autofocus and are typically similarly priced to new entry level cameras, check Adorama.com or KEH.com. Good example would be: a Canon 50D, Nikon D200 or D90, or Sony A700. If that pushes the budget a bit much, maybe try the Canon 40D.

I also want to be able to get shots like this http://www.fordfamilyphotography.com/ Is this something that a camera in my price range would be able to do? Are these types of photos Photoshopped or can a camera really do that? Also what is the best type of photoshop program to get ?

No, for several reasons. First of all, the camera isn't whats really making those photographs, as much as it is the photographer controlling or utilizing light with specific techniques, this is more valuable than many seem to understand. Many people jump from point and shoot to digital SLR only to find out their images are either worse or not any better. Don't expect your pictures to automatically improve just from getting a fancier camera.

Also, he was using a lot of gear, you can see multiple light sources in his outdoor photo's which indicate using powerful strobes which would be about your budget just for one. Good photography doesn't happen overnight, nor does it just happen when you buy expensive enough of gear.

[volks]

Anbesol is so right. For a $600 budget, your options are very limited and more importantly special good shots are more likely the results of a good photographer rather than the camera. If you are serious about this hobby, I would suggest a visit to a good camera shop to get advice on camera types and prices. An option may be to start with a bridge camera that is in your budget, or a good used trade in SLR camera. In order to avoid disappointments down the road, find a good camera shop who knows their stuff and start from there.

[armando_m]

a used D200 and a 70-300 vr lens will work for the soccer images as long as it is done during day light, but that is above the $600. EDIT with a 55-200 Vr lens + used camera it maybe containable in the $600 budget

for the family portraits looking professional any dslr will work, you'll need extra flashes and wireless equipment to control them, that maybe cheaper than nikon brand flashes, or the really big lights like allien bees, I thin this is more containable within the $600,

As the others already mentioned, study, and practice time is what will really make the difference

[Franglais]

Look closely at the photos on the Ford site. They are all done with a telephoto lens. The subjects are some way away and the photographer has zoomed in on them, isolated the subject, made the background and foreground out-of-focus.. That's optics, not Photoshop. People have mentioned the 55-200 or 70-300 - that's the sort of thing you need.

For your football shots, same thing, you can't get close, you need to reach out and just take the action. Same lens. However you also need a camera which can:

- quickly find focus on moving subject and follow it
- shoot immediately when you press the shutter release
- provide Shutter priority mode so that you can pick a high shutter speed yourself and freeze the action
- provide good image quality at 1600 ISO or above so that you can use a high shutter speed even in dull conditions

All current Nikon DSLR's can do this, even the entry-level D3000 (it has the same autofocus system and sensor as the D200 which several people have mentioned).

However there are two desirable features that the D3000 doesn't have but the D300 and D200 do:

- Large clear viewfinder. When shooting sports you really need to see what you are doing. The D3000 viewfinder is horrible (forget about using the LCD screen on the back as well - focus can't follow a moving subject)
- Do a long fast burst ratatatat of images of action. The D3000 will stop after 3-4 images. I never do long bursts anyway. I just try to do one shot at the right moment

Tough to come in under $600. Maybe look for a D80 - very similar to a D200 (including the viewfinder - the burst rate is lower) in a smaller, cheaper body.

[shadwlight]

I want to thank everyone for there imput. I did mean the d3000 sorry. Kmart has the d3000 on sale for 450.00 this week. I have taped the ad on my husands Ipod hoping he gets the hint for mothers day So I just want to feel right about making this decsion as to me that is a lot of money right now. Do you guys think the shutter spead for that will be good for what I want? I know I need to get the 55-200 lense for it but is there anything else I should be looking at?

[Anbesol]

Teh shutter speed has nothing to do with the camera, and everything to do with the lens. With a typical kit lens like the 18-55 or 55-200 and 75-300, your shutter speed is not going to any different than it is on a point n shoot. If you want a faster shutter speed, look at faster lens, like the 50mm f/1.8 which is an excellent lens, super fast, and bargain priced at only $100. The 50mm is only a mild telephoto angle, so its not the best idea for getting close in on your kids sports games. But its a great walkaround and general purpose.

And yeah, I would abandon the D3000 idea in favor of a Nikon D200, Canon 40D, or Sony A700. If you don't feel like overpaying for lens and accessories, stick wtih Canon or Sony and avoid Nikon.

[volks]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3000.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3000.htm
Here is a review of the Nikon d3000, and it's not that good.
Not sure I agree with Anbesol that all Nikon gear is over priced.
Nikon makes very good products most of the time. Have a look at the D40 or better yet the D3100. A lot of folks like it.I would suggest that you first settle on a camera with a kit lens before thinking about additional lenses. Once you have settled on and have your camera, then later go to a camera store and try on different zoom lenses. Some of them may be heavier and costly than you like.

[Loupey]

...I would suggest that you first settle on a camera with a kit lens before thinking about additional lenses. Once you have settled on and have your camera, then later go to a camera store and try on different zoom lenses...

Great to have your input and advice.

For me, my typical advice is exactly the opposite to people starting out: consider what interests you (now and possibly later) and look at the choices of lenses available even if they are currently out of ones price range. Choose the system, then the camera.

Do you want primes? Fast primes? Ultra wides? Super telephotos? Choice of macro lenses? Pancake lenses? Tilt-shift lenses? I'd hate for people to buy a camera only to find that their system doesn't offer lenses that they will want.

Besides, for many many people, the very first dSLR is typically just a "starter" and an upgrade follows soon afterward. So again, allowing a starter camera to marry into a system can be a financially aggravating if the system wasn't part of the original decision-making process.

[AgingEyes]

If your budget is tight, you can always buy third party lenses from Sigma, Tamron, etc.

Without high fps, you can still shoot action shots. You just need to have good timing. Been there done that myself. No, you won't have as many shots as other do.