New dSLR - what would you recommend?

[rob_v]

Hello all,
I just posted a thread about some lenses I found and if they would fit a Nikon d3100.
It got me thinking a bit more before I pull the trigger on this, and would love some feedback if this is right camera.

This is what Im looking at :
Nikon D3100 Amazon.com: Nikon D3100 14.2MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF-S DX VR Nikkor Zoom Lens: Camera & Photo and the Nikon 55-200mm lens Amazon.com: Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR [Vibration Reduction] Nikkor Zoom Lens: Camera & Photo

My budget is ~$900.00 (I could go up to 1k but really would like to stay under it).
My primary use to start w/ will be to photograph my kids, 2 are gymnasts (indoor, low light - no flashes allowed) the 3rd plays strictly outdoor sports. (water-skiing, wakeboard, mountain bike, etc...)

Will this work for what I'm after? After alot of the reading I have been doing, I have a feeling that I'm going to have issues w/ the zoom lens indoors. I'm open to suggestions form people that know a bunch more about this than me!

Thanks
-Rob

[RichardTaylor]

I am a Canon shooter and don't have any experience with Nikon gear.
However the same principals apply no matter what the system.

(1) Indoor low light sports + no flash means - high ISO + fast (F2 atr least) lenses. possibly with a bit of reach (80+mm?) depending on where you are shooting from..


(2) For outdoor use a kit lens would probably be fine - with good technique for the mountain biking. For the water skiing etc you will need long - probably at least 300mm. A 70-300 may cover yoyur needs and does make a good general purpose, relative small & light, long tele zoom.

You don't say what country you in so it is a bit hard to put $ value on any potential purchases and to work out what will meet your budget.

[jml79]

For lenses, I would suggest getting the longer zoom 70-300. You will not really notice the gap between 55mm and 70mm but you will miss that extra 100mm on the other end.

As for indoor with this lens you are going to want faster but your budget won't allow it. What I would do is get one of the newer camera's that have better high ISO performance like the Canon T2i, Sony A580 or Sony A55. With either Canon or Nikon make sure you buy VR (Nikon) or IS (Canon) lenses. With a Sony you don't have to because this is built into the camera. Nikon and Pentax also have camera's with great high ISO performance but they are way outside your $1000 budget.

Disclaimer - I am not a fan of the entry level Nikons. They are the only manufacturer to limit your lens selection when you buy an entry level camera by removing the AF motor. A D3100 and D5000 cannot use all of the lenses a D90 or D7000 can.

[RichardTaylor]

Keep in mind IS or VR will not help to freeze subject motion, although it will help freeze the general scene and possibly help if the subject is at an action "peak".

[inkista]

Instead of the D3100, you may want to consider going with a Canon dSLR body instead. Your budget won't quite cover it, but you could get an entry-level kit for about the same price as the D3100 kit, and then you could also get either an EF 85mm f/1.8 USM or EF 100mm f/2 USM for the gymnastics shooting.

You won't have the versatility of zoom, but you will have a lens with a fast maximum aperture that might work for shooting gymnastics for about $400. A 70-200 f/2.8 would could much more and be slower.

If you go with the D3100, there are only two autofocusing prime lenses that are under $500: the AF-S 50mm f/1.4 and the AF-S 35mm f/1.8. Neither of them are particularly long. And while Nikon does make an 85/1.8, it's an AF lens (which won't autofocus unless you have a D90-tier body), and their 105/2 is a professional-grade portrait lens which costs four figures.

Just a thought.

[roses5682]

this thread has been usefull because I am also looking to upgrade my point and shoot to a DSLR to take pictures of my children indoors and then at their sporting events. I was also considering the nikon 3100 but now may consider a canon rebel after hearing from others.

[inkista]

The main thing you want to take away from this thread, however, is that the camera body probably doesn't matter as much as you think it does, given how good they all are--it's also about the glass.

The cold, hard truth is that indoor sports photography is probably one of the most demanding subjects you can possibly pick in terms of lenses. And cheaper subsitutes are limiting. With sports, you typically need zoom, fast autofocus, long reach, and a fast maximum aperture in combination. Any one of those features can cost. In combination (as in a 70-200 f/2.8 stabilized lens), they can cost a very large amount.

And your camera body only counts as half of one of those three features (fast autofocus). Camera bodies come and go. They're easily the most disposable part of the system. Your permanent purchase is the lens, and a single lens can easily cost twice what your camera body did. Don't think of lenses as add-ons to the camera and something you'll do research about later. Learn about lenses before buying your first dSLR. Because whatever camera body you purchase is going to lock you into a camera mount system.