Need help finding a Cam. to shoot football games. Powershot SX10IS Keeps coming up blurry! Recommend

Discussion in 'What Camera Should I Buy?' started by kipingram, Sep 12, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kipingram

    kipingram New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bought a Powershot SX10IS to shoot my son's football games. Also will do Basketball later and just everyday stuff nothing fancy as I am quite a novice. Just wanted clear action shots. Problems seems to be that of course its at night... lighted field.... and the action itself. Zooming in that far from the stands isnt a problem. At first i just used the Auto and Sports settings. Not so great mostly blurred on action and grainy on most things. Called Canon for ideas and they had me experiment with the manual settings ISO, F, and aper. couldnt seem to find a happy medium still blurry and graing most of the time. Im sure Im not setting things up optimally but wondering if a real SLR camera would makes things easier?? Like Nikon D5000, D60 or Sony Alphas, Canon Eos???? Any help would be greatly appreciated!! Would like to keep the cost under $900 at most. Preferably down around $600 to $700. Also a have a Nikon 35mm N75 with an Extra Zoom lens AF 300 zoom lens. Not sure if its compatible with any of the digitals??
     
  2. ifse

    ifse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since you need low light capability, short shutter lag, preferably shutter speed control and good telephoto, I'd suggest a decent DSLR with a good zoom lens. Within your budget, you are probably looking at the following options (I used amazon but you can try other stores). I also looked only at Canon since that's what I assume you prefer. There may be similar deals with Nikon or other brands.

    http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital..._1_52?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1252762233&sr=1-52: Canon Digital Rebel XS SLR "Black" 2 Lens Kit with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Image Stabilizer Lens & EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lens, $700

    http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital..._1_53?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1252762233&sr=1-53: Canon Digital Rebel XS 10.1MP Digital SLR Camera (Black) + Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS Lens + Tamron 70-300mm Di LD Macro Lens for Canon EOS + Spare LP-E5 Battery + 4GB Card + Gadget Bag, $660

    Both include a Canon XS camera, not the latest and greatest, but still quite an excellent camera. The first package is pure muscle, just camera and lenses. The second package costs less and includes an "off brand" telephoto lens, but I've used Tamron before and liked it. It alsod gives you a few useful accessories.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2015
  3. Andy Stanton

    Andy Stanton Super Moderator Super Moderator

    Messages:
    11,289
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The only thing I'd point out is that the long zoom lenses in those two Canon deals are not image stabilized. Image stabilization will help prevent blurring from hand movement, especially when you're using the long end of the zoom. A moderately priced Canon long zoom lens with IS is the EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6, which Amazon is selling for $252.58.
     
  4. Jim Keenan

    Jim Keenan News/Review Writer News/Review Writer

    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Shooting night sports (or indoor when basketball season arrives) is one of the tougher assignments for a camera and photographer, and the DSLR is the best way to handle it. Ultrazooms are hampered by their high ISO performance and to a lesser extent by their maximum aperture at the telephoto end. You just can't ramp up the ISO on the ultrazoom to get faster shutter speeds without noise raining on the parade to a much higher degree than with a DSLR.

    Not to say that a DSLR alone is the automatic fix - the lens is going to play a big role in success with these kinds of shots. Kit zoom lenses tend to be slow at the telephoto end (a higher f/number is slower - when you see a lens listed as a 75-300 f/4-5.6 that tells you the lens zooms from 75 to 300mm and has a maximum aperture of f/4 at 75mm and f/5.6 at 300mm). Ideally you'd get a fast, stabilized zoom to mount on the body, but getting fast lenses gets into serious money and will likely explode your budget. You will almost certainly have to go for a slower, stabilized lens to stay within budget parameters.

    Since you have a Nikon already that should be the first brand to look at since that lens may work on a new digital Nikon. If it's a Nikon AF-I or AF-S lens it will be fully compatible, and if a different Nikon AF you will have some compatibility. Tell us what the lens is exactly - since it probably dates from the N75 era (2003-2006) there's a good chance you have some or all compatibilty, but probably no stabilization. But if it happens to be a Nikon AF-S 300/f4 you're in real good shape.
     
  5. kipingram

    kipingram New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow I picked the right place to ask this question! Thanks alot you guys I have a feeling the info I'm getting here will be a huge help in getting some great pictures! By the way Im not loyal to any particular brand. Like I said I have a Nikon 35mm. I just thought the Canon Powershot seemed to fit the bill (on paper) for an inexpensive price, but as is the case most times... you get what you pay for! I think it would be a great cam. for lots of uses, just not what I'm doing.
    Keep the suggestions coming I'm open to whatever!
     
  6. kipingram

    kipingram New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    By the way the Lens' for my Nikon are
    Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1:3.3-5.6 G
    Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 G
     
  7. LinXitoW

    LinXitoW Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It might not be a bad idea going with a DSLR that has image stabilization built in. Except for Nikon and Canon every other company offers some sort of entry-lvl DSLR with this built in feature. It'll save you a bit of money and hassle, since you wont be restricted to looking for image stabilized lenses.
     
  8. kipingram

    kipingram New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0



    By the way the Lens' for my Nikon are
    Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1:3.3-5.6 G
    Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 G
     
  9. Jim Keenan

    Jim Keenan News/Review Writer News/Review Writer

    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    OK, AF "G" Nikkor lenses will meter but not autofocus with entry level Nikon DSLRs - you'd have to go with a D90 body to get AF as well. The lenses you have aren't stabilized.

    You'll get comparable image quality from any of the major brand DSLR entry level products, so other factors come into play (such as camera ergonomics, cost, and features) if you're not wedded to a particular brand at this point. Don't underestimate the importance of ergonomics - how a camera feels and handles when shooting is an important factor. And a personal observation - if live view is suggested as a compelling reason to select one camera over another, try before you buy. If it's a feature you like, great, but IMO it has little use on a DSLR - I've got it on both my Nikons (D3, D300) and I've used it once on each just to see how it worked, and have never had need to use it for real.

    The stabilization question (lenses vs. in-body) will probably never go away - as was mentioned earlier, Canon and Nikon require stabilized lenses, Sony, Pentax and Olympus go in-body. (Fuji DSLRs are Nikon-compatible for lenses). The advantage of in-body is stabilization with any lens, but one drawback I've heard mentioned is in-body stabilization may not be as effective with longer telephoto lenses, particularly in the smaller entry-level bodies. The reason is in-body stabilization typically shifts the image sensor to compensate for camera shake, and as you go longer and longer with telephoto size the field of view gets smaller and smaller, and camera shake impacts the smaller field of view more significantly. The argument is there may not be enough room in the body to shift the sensor far enough to compensate for all the shake with the big lenses. I shoot a Nikon so I've got no extensive hands-on experience with in-body stabilization.

    If a kit lens is all you're ever going to mount I can't imagine in-body stabilization would be a problem (and that assumes the criticism I've mentioned is valid). If you decide down the road that you need a 400 or 500mm telephoto to get even closer to the action it might not provide the level of stabilization with an in-body camera vs. a stabilized lens of the same size.

    Try any of the cameras you might be interested in at a store, get stabilization in one way or the other, and get the setup that feels best to you both in your hands and in your wallet - image quality will take care of itself.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page