help-looking for my first slr setup

[JJphoto]

if it has to be under $1000, I'll get the 200mm/f2,8L and any rebel body, new, refurbished, used, whatever. as long as it fits in your budget and I'll shoot indoor hockey game with f2.8 and ISO800-1600, I think you will get good enough result to sell.


refurbished rebel XS with kit lens sells for $429(http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXSKBR.html?searchinfo=refurbish)


200mm/f2.8L sells for about $750(http://www.adorama.com/CA20028AFU.html)


the prime 200mm/2.8L lens is the cheapest 200mm/2.8L, and rebels are slower than 40/50D, but still can do the job.


if you can really get close to the player, 40D/85mm1.8 combo will do the job well.


refurbished 40D sells for 699(http://www.adorama.com/CA20028AFU.html)

[RonG]

First of all don't buy new. Use Adorama.com "used equipment" or KEH.com and buy a used canon 40d and if your shooting hockey you will need a zoom. I'm betting most of your games are at night or indoors and so a fast lens is necessary. Buy a used 17-55mm canon. This combo will take you to about $1200 dollars used. Open a zenfolio Account and use it to sell your images to pay for all your new equipment. Good Luck, The penalty box is my favorite location.

[brendanmcd22]

Thanks a lot for the help guys! I will definitely look at all of those options.


Just out of curiosity...shutr and bob williams, how much are you looking for for the xti?


And RonG, I will be either on the bench or in the penalty box. Or at worst in an area where the glass isn't as tall so I don't have to shoot through it. That being said, how much of a zoom do you think I would need to cover most of the rink? I will hoprefully be selling the images to the kids' parents and stuff.


Thanks again.

[shutr]

The body and lens are in like new condition. No signs of wear, no scratches, no nicks etc. If the continous counter is correct the camera has less than a thousand actuations. This deal includes: body, lens, battery, battery charger, Canon strap, USB cable, video cable, EOS digital software disk, software instruction disk, instruction manual and original box. The whole kit for $300.


Thank you,


Bruce

[Dallasphotog]

Good advice from lots of folks above.


When my daughter started shooting sports for the paper I started her with a Rebel XT and my EF70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM. She shot a ton of cover pages and contest winners with that rig. Of course that lens will bust your budget, but the EF70-200mm f/4.0 USM will fit your goal of under $1,000.


I'd find a used XT and the EF70-200mm f/4.0.

[Stratification]

Once you've settled on an SLR body and first lens, you should probably rent any other lenses you're considering before expanding your collection. It's amazing how much more you learn shooting with a lens rather than just trying to reading about it.

[dmckinny]

Brendanmcd22,


I just got into a DSLR last year, also for shooting sports primarily. I currently have a 30D, 18-55 kit lens, 50 1.8 and a 70-200 f4. I mostly shoot outdoors (soccer) so the 70-200 is perfect for us budget minded folks. However, for shooting indoors, you are going to need the fastest lens in the right focal point range, and a camera body with the best high ISO performance you can afford.


Given your budget of around $1000 I would suggest getting an 85 1.8 and any rebel body you can then afford.


I have tried to shoot indoor sports with the 50 1.8 and it works but it is still a little short so I end up doing a lot of cropping. My indoor shoots have been in areas smaller than a hockey rink so you might even consider a 100 or 200 prime. Also I wouldn't worry about frame rate. What I have been finding is that timing the shot results in far more keepers than relying on a fast frame rate.





Good luck,


David

[IAMB]

I have tried to shoot indoor sports with the 50 1.8 and it works but it is still a little short so I end up doing a lot of cropping. My indoor shoots have been in areas smaller than a hockey rink so you might even consider a 100 or 200 prime.

Indoor sports with a 50 1.8? You, sir, are a braver man than I. I only get out the nifty fifty if I'm dead sure it's going to be a situation that doesn't require a reasonably fast autofocus speed.

Also I wouldn't worry about frame rate. What I have been finding is that timing the shot results in far more keepers than relying on a fast frame rate.

Adding to that, a high frame rate only helps if your lens' focus motor can keep up. I can hit 80% keepers in AI servo and high frame rate with my 1D II and 70-200 2.8, but I wouldn't dream of hitting the same keeper rate using, say, the 28-200 or 75-300.





That being said, my .02 is to pick up a 30 or 40D and either the 135 2.0, 100 2.0 (for the budget-minded) or the 70-200 2.8 non IS... any of which should work for hockey.

[mpphoto12]

i play hockey as well as shoot it. i know its tough for lighting.if you are on the bench i suggest the 85 1.8 becasue it is not zoom but you will be able to get away with a lower iso on a mediocre body. Also from what i know the bench is close to the action so the range will be plenty.

[RonG]

I still like the 17-55mm if sitting in the penalty box or covering either goal. My problem with a 70-200 has always been intervening players between the action you're shooting and the lens. Additionally if you have only one camera and a 70-200 Murphy's law guarantees the action will happen 4 feet away from you. I'd rather crop a little or pay 79 bucks for genuine fractals than have a bunch of pictures of knees, skates and elbows.