Question that may have been asked, but...

[ciddog91]

I know this question has been asked probably a hundred times, but I thought one more may help me (I am not a smart man).. I have shot some sports pics of my family/kids with film. Some are good, some well.... I want to get a DSLR to shoot pics of my kids at sporting events.. Gymnastics is one..Indoors, not very far (some right if front of me, others across a gym)..Kids I shoot are in the 10-13 range.. Not pros.. Soccer is the other.. outdoor.. small fiels (10 years old type players).. Again no the pros..Not as fast or as far..

I am thinking about a Canon 20D with a Canon 28-105 4.0 - 4.5 and a Canon 75-300 4.0-5.6.. Not USM lenses..

Does anyone have any suggestions?? I was going to get a 30D but thought due to other posts, 20D is good..I do not shoot a lot and am learning photography in this world.. P&S is my experiance with digital so far..I will get better lenes as the kids get older/bigger and faster....is there a set up for under about $1400-1500 that will last me for 2+ years??

Sorry for the long post, I will not do that again, but need some info...

Thanks... Phil

[JSPhoto]

Welcome Phil,

Actually I hadn't seen anyone ask about gymnastics. But shooting gymnastics is really tough, mostly due to very poor lighting. You may be better off with the 30D than the 20D. The 20D has issues in low light and just doesn't focus well enough or fast enough.

Your best bet would really be to get a used original 1D body. One reader here picked one up for $900. Second, get the 70-200mm USM IS f2.8 ($1800) or If you can't swing it go with the Sigma 70-200 for around $650 That will hold you over for several years.

JS

[SmartWombat]

Canon 20D with a Canon 28-105 4.0 - 4.5 and a Canon 75-300 4.0-5.6.. Not USM lenses.

Those lenses have too small an aperture for indoors, unless the light is good.
You probably won't be able to use the wide open aperture, you'll find as you stop them down the quality increases - but then it's too dark to get action photos!

Problem is that fast lenses, say a 70-200 f2.8, are expensive - even from Sigma or Tokina instead of Canon lenses.

Your budget is tight.$1500 so you're pretty much limited to the Sigma.

[ciddog91]

Thanks Guys... I am not Canon loyal or specific, but I will go with a 30d an a kit lens for "kicking around the house" photos and a Sigma or Tokina 70-200 F2.8 lens. I am wondering though if there is another lens for closer work (25 30 yards)??

[JSPhoto]

I'd definately go with the Sigma, not the Tokina as I know the Sigma is much faster and has much better optics.
The 70-200 will work fine for 25-30 yards as well.

JS

[Homer]

All has been pretty much said about the lens you should get. I shoot strickly sports action (baseball / softball / football / soccer) and use the 70-200 f2.8 (Minolta) about 99% of the time. Spend the extra and get a good lens that will grow with you and last a very long time. The 70-200 can give you full body shots in the 25-30yd range easily and is great for those distance shots. Don't forget the lens multipler your camera will have, such as my Minolta 7D has a 1.5, making my 70-200 a 105-300 2.8 lens. You'll be happy that you got the 2.8 lens when you start to shoot indoors. Maybe not now, but life has a way of changing on us.

Jim