About to purchase XSI

[SRPHOTO]

a great lens that is very fun to use is the 50mm F/1.4 USM lens its great depth of field and cheap :]

[ShutterbugJohan]

Go with a 30D or 40D. They have ISO 3200, and you will definitely need ISO 3200 if you get the 70-200mm f4 and need to shoot in low light.

[ultima16888]

start with 50mm F1.4 You won't bedisappointed, you won't be able to zoom but for a beginner you'll learn to walk around and really compose your shots, it works great in low light, and also in situations like you are talking about most likely there will be people around, distracting background, and also low light. I think it's much nice to take good pictures and crop in on the computer than a blurry one that you can't even use at full size. if you are not printing anything big, shoot with 50mm and you can crop in to a certain extend(Digital zoom). it's cheap, fast and high quality, pro fashion photographers also use this lens.


once you save up, work towards a 17-55 or 70-200, but for now, I don't see any reason not to buy a high quality prime and use digital zoom since the new body has high pixel count, I crop in on my work all the time even when I use 200mm, and they print just fine for general purposes.


(or one of the 100mm or 200mm prime mentioned above if you have to be far away from their practice or competition)

[Tom Wertman]

I own a 50 f/1.4 and it is a great lens. I rarely use it for sports unless I want to capture half the basketball court or hockey rink. If you are looking to capture action along with your kids facial expressions during the heat of the game than you need a telephoto and preferrably a zoom. Walking around with a 50 1.4 is a great idea for learnig to compose in the street, vacation, landscapes, etc. But sports photography is more specific to the action or play of the moment. I suggest going to photo.net and reading the sports photography lessons available there or better yet taking a sports photography class to learn how to get the shots seen in sport magazines. Those shots BTW are the ones that hang on my kids bedroom wall that they admire most. Themselves caught in the heat of the moment making a great play. Remember you are probaly not going to be able to get close to the action without a press pass. A 50mm lens from the stands is going to be wide angle. Nice for what they are but your original post implied getting shots of your kids in action. I'm assuming you want to be able to recognize them so they don't look like just another player on the court or in the pool.

[nerdmonkey]

I agree with Tom -- I also own the 50mm f/1.4 and think it is a great lens, but it doesn't sound like it will be the right focal length for you. I often shoot my girlfriend jumping horses. When we're outdoors, having an f/4 lens is more than fine (I have the 24-105 f/4). But for indoor events, an f/4 lens barely cuts it at ISO 1600 for very decently lit situations. Most indoor horse arenas are not as well lit and having f/4 is almost useless.


I personally think you will enjoy the pictures you take more with a faster prime (non-zoom) lens if you want to keep the price low. You won't be able to zoom and may have to get up and move around to get the shot you want, but the shot will definitely be more likely to be a keeper if it has a fast enough shutter speed to freeze the action. The 100mm f/2 sounds like it would be a good, affordable place to start.


As far as getting a 40D over an XSi, it is a definite price jump if you're buying new. The image quality of the 40D is no better than the XSi. The biggest advantage will be the ability to take twice as many pictures per second. You can also use ISO 3200 (but it will be quite noisy) and get slightly better focusing, but you're definitely paying a premium for these features.


If I was on an under $1100 budget and buying new, I think I would buy the XSi with the kit lens which is really a great starter setup and a great combo to take everyday pictures with. And then I would buy the 100mm f/2 for your sports photos.


If you had more money to blow? I would upgrade the lens to the 70-200 f/2.8 (quite a price jump!) and the 40D or 50D.

[Tom Wertman]

Here is an example of a hockey shot I spoke of earlier using f/4. It was taken using a 40D with an EF 300 f/4.0L IS lens wide open from the penalty box. I set a custom white balance first using an ExpoDisc on the front of the lens because indoor arenas have poor lighting. The shutter speed was 1/250 per second and the ISO was 1600. I used auto smart fix in Photoshop afterward. Normally I would go to greater lengths in post processing but for simplicity sake I used something quicker. I also reduced the size of the print for posting. The result should be satisfying to a dad wanting shots of his kids IMO anyway. I also printed an 8 X 10 copy for the coach which is outstanding also IMO.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.75/CC_2D00_JV_5F00_HFL002-copy-copy.jpg[/img]

[nerdmonkey]

Nice shot! It looks like the ice arena is probably a more lit environment than most equine arenas and the f/4 works well there.


Perhaps the 70-200 f/4 would be a better budget option for the original poster for a few hundred dollars more than the 100mm f/2.

[Nicholas]

For starters, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 85mm f/1.8 and EF 100mm f/2.0 are really nice. Depends on the distance, either one of those will surely meet your needs without breaking the banks

[donnman]

Tom that is a great shot and is exactly the kind of photos Im looking to take.


Aside from a new camera and lens it looks like I need to invest in photoshop as well.


So, based on all the recommendations it appears I should forget the XSI and go for a 40D. Im not sure I can afford that at the moment, I will have to shop for some deals.


Im actually thinking still of the XSI with the kit lens and maybe the 100mm lens as I think this will get this "DAD" all the photos Im looking for. At least from everything I have been reading. But with all the info from everyone Im reluctant to make the purchase as it seems over time I will be unhappy with the XSI.


Thanks everyone for all the suggestions and tips....Now to just make up my mind, LOL


Don

[Colin]

It's probably a little short for taking pictures from the bleachers, but I'd second that it's an absolutely wonderful lens for the money.


The 70-200 f/4 will probably be a far more useful lens all around, and if you go high ISO and maybe even push down the exposure compensation 1/3 or 1/2 stop, might do the job even in low light. Notnearly as niceashaving a 2.8 available, but you can deal.


However, if the PRIMARY purpose is shootinga particular sport situation, and the bleacher seats are at a distance that is relatively constant (say you're fairly far away, and sitting near the middle of the field/court whatever) you can plan for a particular focal length that will work very well for most situations. Then for the money, I'd opt for one of the fast prime lenses mentioned. Still, a 200 f/2.8 would be great if you've got some distance between you and you need the speed, but it'll be lousy trying to take group pictures of a birthday party in anything smaller than a large convention room . Even a 70-200, with a'crop' sensor body has difficulty getting a whole person into a shot until they're about 20 feet away. So, unless this is going to be a dedicated telephoto kind of purpose camera, keep the kit lens until you find something you like to replace it that at least dips down into the twenty-something focal length.