Good Camera for sports & action

I am a photographer for a independent wrestling company and looking to invest in a new camera that matches the quality I need to take quite a few Action shots and fast speed photos I need advice with what would be a good camera for sports or alot of action I need something that will be capable of taking photos when there is alot of movement and not blurr the picture. also that will be good with keeping battery power that wont need to be charged as often or have batteries replaced frequently because these shows can be 1-3 hours long and I dont have time to rotate batteries or worry if the photo is blurred out. if someone can suggest or guide me to a camera that might be affordable or fit the description I will greatly appreciate it I would use this camera often so its got to be something that will be reliable with the job I have

+1 for the D90. Or if a Canon interests you, Canon's T1i is about the same class as the Nikon D90. You'll need to handle both to see which one appeals to you. Or if you are thinking of semi-pro/pro class bodies, look for a used Nikon D300 (can be found used for around $1100) or a new Canon 50D ($1300 @ BB). The 50D kinda falls between the D90 and D300. The 50D and D300 will be bigger than the T1i and D90 physically so if you have smaller hands these may be easier.
Lenses. Since wrestling events I've been too (yes I'll admit I've gone to a WWE event a couple times) the rings are pretty well lit. You may get away with a straight f/4.
Canon has a nice 17-40 ($840) but that may be a bit wide IMO. Maybe start with a 24-105 f/4 IS USM($1250). Only experience I've had with Canon lenses is when I play with friends Canons.
Nikon really doesnt have much for a straight f/4 lens in a range like Canon does (which irks me since theres times I dont need a f/2.8 nor in a shoot where the lense could get damaged). Also Nikon lenses arent exactly cheap and are a bit more $$$ than its Canons counterparts. But the glass IS extremely high quality. For fast action I wouldnt use 3rd party lenses for a Nikon. Nikons AF-S (focus motors are built in the lens) snaps instantly into focus. A screw drive lense (Nikon AF-D) uses the focus motor in the body and is slightly slower. Even my Nikon AF-S 600mm f/4 literally snaps into focus on 550mph jets at airshows. I have a few 3rd party lenses and even though the IQ of the lens is near Nikon quality, focus speed isnt as fast (even Sigma's HSM lenses dont focus as fast as AF-S in my experience).
Which ever brand you get, Canon or Nikon, they are both high quality equipment. I always recommend only these two brands of cameras for DSLR's. These are the two top dogs.
King of the World...

Similar Messages

Digital Camera for sports shots

Looking for a camera with great zoom capabilities for the football field, can stop a baseball at 80mph and also take great indoor gym shots for volleyball. Any suggestions?

No point-and-shoot will do well for sports at all. Contrast detection autofocus is just too slow for sports.
For daytime work, you can probably get a much cheaper DSLR setup, and add the "fast glass" later as you discover which shooting situations you feel are lacking.
I'm a Pentax owner, so I can give you an idea of what to look for in an entry level Pentax system, however Canon and Nikon should have similar entry-level setups available.
Pentax K-x "full kit" with 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 and 55-300 f/3.5-5.6 lens: $850. You used get a LOT of savings (close to 50%) on the 55-300 when buying it in the kit - you still get decent savings but not nearly as much as you used to. That'll do the trick to start with for most daytime shooting situations, and some indoor situations (depending on exact lighting levels - while it may all appear similar to the eyes which adjust quite well, indoor lighting brightness can vary a LOT from venue to venue.)
The "full kit" with the 55-300 is out of stock in most places I've looked. Another option is the basic kit with the 18-55 only ($550) and a Tamron 70-300 3.5-5.6 lens ($165) - not quite the image quality of the Pentax 55-300, but still pretty good.
With Canon and Nikon, you'll find base kits (body and 18-55 lens with some sort of stabilization) in the same range as the K-x basic kit. The problem is that since the K-x has in-body stabilization, the Tamron 70-300 is stabilized on Pentax but not Canon/Nikon. That's the disadvantage of Canon/Nikon initially - you pay a per-lens premium for IS that's significant for entry-level lenses. However, Pentax has no first-party glass past 300mm which limits your growth in the Pentax system a LOT. The per-lens IS penalty gets less as lens prices rise with the faster lenses.
Nikon and Canon dominate pro sports photography due to the availability of long fast glass. Nikon is currently doing very well in terms of high ISO noise performance (although right now the K-x is near the top of this category, but Pentax can't match that with their higher-end bodies.)
Also, two things to look for in SLR lens specifications:
1) Focal length. Larger number is better. You want a 300mm lens available for most sports, at least.
2) Minimum aperture. Lower number is better. Consumer grade zooms are usually something like f/3.5-5.6, pro grade zooms are frequently constant f/2.8. An f/2.8 lens will let in four more times as much light as an f/5.6 lens - meaning four times the shutter speed. It'll also autofocus better. Sports with a consumer grade slow lens is tough but doable in daylight, and very difficult indoors (but possible if conditions are just right - my undergrad alma mater's hockey rink is JUST bright enough to get OK pictures from.)
*disclaimer* I am not now, nor have I ever been, an employee of Best Buy, Geek Squad, nor of any of their affiliate, parent, or subsidiary companies.

Good camera for Aperture?

Hello. I am looking for a good camera that is not a DSLR. I have found a Sony that has 12.1MP and would like some opinions before I make the purchase. Any help would be appreciated. Here is the link to the camera at Sony's site: http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=1055 1&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=20008504

There's only 1 'compact' camera that I'm aware of that still supports RAW which is where you would get most of your advantage with using Aperture. The camera in question is the Leica D-Lux 3 which is a superb camera although a little pricey. I've borrowed one once and it took pictures that were quite frankly unbelievable when compared even with some pictures from a D200 Nikon. Have a look at http://www.leica-camera.co.uk/photography/compactcameras/d-lux3/ and try not to make your decision too much on the price. If you really want to get the best from Aperture and your Camera then the Leica would be my choice. If you're not hung up on the size, then Panasonic's mentioned here are also superb but the later ones such as the FZ-18 aren't supported which is Apertures downfall against Lightroom but that's a whole new topic.

Right camera for sporting events

I am beginning to put together a "highlight" video of my daughter playing softball. Any advice for what camera I should be looking for and what additional features I need to consider would be greatly appreciated. Right now, I am looking for a camera that can operate on AC, can be monitored via blue tooth or wifi, and records in a format which is easily edited.

So your actually looking for a video camera.
I have a Sony HD Camcorder. Plugs into an AC adapter. Most camcorders will come with an AC power supply. Which is pretty good to have when transferring and for long recording sessions. However, my sony will go for hours on a single charge. It all depends on how high you set the quality.
Canon makes out standing camcorders as well.

Good camera for FCE 4 up to $600

Hi. I am a teacher and need recommendations for a camera that will easily interface with FCE 4. Middle school students (12-13 yrs) will be using it so it needs to be straight forward and sturdy.
Thank you very much for your suggestions,
Akamai Mom

I have a Sony HD Bloggie as a cheap HD camcorder, that's under $200 at BHPhoto, and uses a memory stick. The reviews say it doesn't work in low light very well, I haven't run it thru a lot of tests yet myself (it's my second camera when I need two angles, I'll know how it goes in a couple days if I get this project working, but initially the video looks good).
Nice thing about this is it's easy and there's not many controls. You flip open the view screen and it's on. Obviously it's not for professional use.

Best camera for low light and sports

have the sx200is
looking for a newer camera for sports and low light shots

The challenge with sports is that you are REALLY pushing the camera gear to it's limits. Fast action requires fast shutter speeds. But fast shutter speeds demand a lot of light and only outdoor games played during the daytime have that. Indoor games or games played under field lighting at night generally do not have the kind of lighting needed to shoot with fast shutter speeds -- not the kind of shutter speeds needed to freeze action. So this ends up demanding a camera with excellent ISO performance and lenses with very low focal ratios so they can collect a LOT more light when the shutter is open. This gear is expensive.
You will want to consider a reasonable budget depending on what you can afford and the needs of the specific sports.
Are these indoor or outdoor sports? If outdoors, are these played during the day or are they night games?
The "best" camera for sports and low light is the EOS-1D X. It has phenominal low-light performance, has an amazing focus system, and can shoot at 12 frames per second. But it's about $6800 for the "body only" and then you still need lenses. I'm guessing this is probably not what you had in mind. But if money were not a constraint... this would be the one to go for.
The 5D III is another amazing camera for low light performance and and also has an amazing focusing system (largely the same as the 1D X) can shoot at 6 frames per second, and only costs $3500... again, that's the "body only". Still probably not what you had in mind.
The 70D has an extremely good focus system (though not as good as the 5D III and 1D X), not quite as good as low light (but pretty good and much better than a point & shoot camera) and shoots at 7 frames per second (1 fps faster than 5D III) and it only costs $1200 for the body only.
The T5i will be noticeably less expensive than the 70D... a good (but not extremely good) focusing system and 5 frames per second, but the body and 1 kit lens combined is about $850 but that wont a lens suitable for use shooting sports so you'll still need to invest in more appropriate lenses.
When shooting action photography in low light, what you _really_ want is a lens that can collect a lot more light than the average lens for that very brief moment when the shutter is open. Such a lens can allow you to use a faster shutter speed to help freeze those action shots. But *which* lens you use depends on the sport.
For low-light sports, these would ideally be f/2.8 zoom lenses... but f/2.8 zoom lenses are not cheap. Canon's EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM (ideal for most indoor sports and outdoor sports IF the action is happening close to you) is about $2500. Sigma's lens is about half that price. But if you're covering action on a large athletic field and the players are far away, they'll still be small. Sigma makes a 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom for sports... for the low low price of only $3600.
Scott Kelby does a video to talk about sports photography and he discusses the equipment used and why... and basically says if you want the gear for shooting sports, you basically need a suitcase full of money.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

A good miniDV camera for footage capture for FC6?

I've got a Macbook Pro and FC6 and I'm looking to buy a miniDV camera just for the purpose of capturing my footage. I'm looking for a cheap camera, like the Samsung SC-D382, but don't know what sort of specifications to look for. Can I use a USB cable to capture footage, or does it need to be a 6 pin firewire cable? Also, does anyone have any recommendations regarding cheap but good cameras for capturing? Thanks!

look for a camera that also has A/V inputs and will pass them through to firewire. That way, if the need arises, you can capture from an analog source such as a VCR (archiving, perhaps). This is a great budget solution, as dedicated D/A converters can cost as much as or more than a cheap miniDV camera.

Need New Camera for Vacation (Please Read)

This summer I am going out West and going to Teton and Yellowstone National Parks. As you may know there is plenty of beautiful sceneries, and wildlife to enjoy in this part of the U.S. So I am wanting to take some of it back with me and show my family some of the great pictures I took. Last year I went and got to see many things that my old camera couldn't focus or zoom in good enough. So I have made the decision to go camera looking again. I'm looking for a camera that can zoom fairly well that doesn't get all fuzzy. I'm a pretty big guy and my hands are quite large, so I'm not looking for one of those little cameras that fit in the palm of your hand. I need something that where I push down the button and everything will remain steady, and I'm looking around in the price range of $200-$250 dollars. If anybody can help on giving some recommendations, I will be forever thankful.
Thanks

No, I actually don't know anybody that has a DSLR. I've decided that's not what I needed. I'm by far no professional photographer and for me to spend that much money for a used or older camera, when I only will use it once or twice a year would be ridiculous. I took some pretty good pictures last year when I went out west and even won a picture contest with the little Canon Powershot my aunt had given me when she bought her new camera. I was just thinking about possibly getting something new because 1) I have lost my old camera 2) I was wanting something with a little more zoom. I have been researching and CNET and alot of other reviews that I have read say that the Sony Cybershot DSC-H20B is really good camera for my price range. Anybody got any comments on the Sony Cybershot DSC-H20B?

Which is the better lens for wildlife, sport action canon 70-200 is usm ii series L or Canon 100-400

Which would be a better for wildlife and sport action Canon 70-200 mm is usm ii serie L f/2.8 or Canon 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6?

On what camera? It makes a big difference depending upon whether you are using full frame or a crop camera.
Also depends upon the particular sports and type of wildlife most commonly involved, how much reach you might need. Outdoor, daytime sports vs indoor and nightime sports is another key factor.
On a crop camera a 70-200 is generally a lot more usable than it is on full frame, for sports and wildlife. An f2.8 lens and 70-200 might be ideal for indoor sports even with a crop camera. It also might be plenty for large game that can be pretty closely approacted. But for small and more shy wildlife, sports on a larger playing field, you'll more likely need the 100-400. But as an f4.5-5.6 lens that's going to be more of a daytime-only lens.
The 100-400mm is unusual in that it's a push/pull zoom. This can be particularly fast to use and makes the lens popular among photograhers shooting fast moving subjects such as birds in flight and air shows.
If you give serious consideration to the 70-200/2.8 IS II in combination with teleconverter EF 2X III, I'd suggest renting and trying them toghether first. The reason is that a stronger 2X teleconverter has more effect on image quality than a weaker TC. The specific combination of the 70-200 Mark II lens and the 2X Mark III TC is pretty darned good.... better than the combo earlier versions of each item. But whether or not it's up to your expectastions is a judgment call only you can make. So it might be wise to rent before you buy, just to be sure.
If instead you start to take a hard look at the 100-400mm, once again you might want to rent it and give it a try. Some people really like the push/pull zoom design. Some don't. (I'm one of the latter... but to be fair this is largely an old prejudice from trying to use that type of zoom in the past, long before IS. I always found push-pull zooms hard to get a steady shot with.... But the 100-400's IS goes a long way toward solving that problem.)
And those two really aren't your only choices.
Personally I use a pair of crop cameras (7D), most of the time one fitted with a 70-200, and the other fitted with a 300/4 IS, sometimes in combination with an EF 1.4X II teleconverter. Or, when I don't need to be mobile and can set up a tripod, I'll use a 300/2.8 IS, both by itself and with EF 1.4X II or 2X II teleconverters.
Another possibility is two lower cost lenses... such as a 70-200/4 IS in combination with a third party lens such as the Sigma 120-400 OS or 150-500 OS. Those lenses are considerably less expensive than the 70-200/2.8 II and the 100-400, respectively. You might be able to afford both and still find they meet your needs very well.
I use the 70-200/4 IS, as well as a copy of the first version of the 70-200/2.8 IS, and they are excellent lenses too. No doubt about it, the 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II is top of the heap and exceptionally good... but rest assured those other 70-200s are no slouches.
If using a full frame camera, for large field sports and more distant, smaller wildlife.... better start saving up. You're going to need one or two of the super telephotos, such as the new EF 200-400/4L IS 1.4X that I'm saving up for!
p.s. By the way, if not already doing so you might want to try Back Button Focusing. It's a very popular technique among sports/action and wildlife photographers. I've been using it for years for virtually everything I shoot, and can't imagine using any other method now.
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

Which camera body next for sports and low light?

All: I have that bug to get another Canon body. I have the opportunity to get a 7D for a little over $400, but is this the camera for me? I have gone from the Canon XTI to the Canon 60D. I love the 60D and thought of getting a 2nd body to keep the camera stuff (charger, batteries and SD cards) simpler and convenient. But I have been thinking of upgrading, if I am going to look for a 2nd body. I shoot a lot of low light and sports (soccer, basket ball and baseball mostly). To help with the low light, I upgraded my telophoto lens from a Tamron AF Aspherical XR DI LD(IF) 28-300 that is great for outdoors, but struggles a little inside.To upgrade that, I bought the Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-200mm 1:2.8 L. This lens took care of my low light indoor problem with school concerts. In reading a little, they say the 7D is the way to go. But it is the first series, not the 2nd. Does that really matter? Instead of reading for hours, days and weeks, can some of you shed some light on what you think? I am also trying to stay in a reasonable budget of less than a $1000. Don't tell the wife I have the bug. That I will worry about after I decide what might be right. I look forward in hearing from the forum and I thank you ahead of time for your feedback and suggestions.

All: I have that bug to get another Canon body. I have the opportunity to get a 7D for a little over $400, but is this the camera for me? I have gone from the Canon XTI to the Canon 60D. I love the 60D and thought of getting a 2nd body to keep the camera stuff (charger, batteries and SD cards) simpler and convenient. But I have been thinking of upgrading, if I am going to look for a 2nd body. I shoot a lot of low light and sports (soccer, basket ball and baseball mostly). To help with the low light, I upgraded my telophoto lens from a Tamron AF Aspherical XR DI LD(IF) 28-300 that is great for outdoors, but struggles a little inside.To upgrade that, I bought the Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-200mm 1:2.8 L. This lens took care of my low light indoor problem with school concerts. In reading a little, they say the 7D is the way to go. But it is the first series, not the 2nd. Does that really matter? Instead of reading for hours, days and weeks, can some of you shed some light on what you think? I am also trying to stay in a reasonable budget of less than a $1000. Don't tell the wife I have the bug. That I will worry about after I decide what might be right. I look forward in hearing from the forum and I thank you ahead of time for your feedback and suggestions.

Need a good flash video camera for use with my Mac...Suggestions?

I have been looking at these things for weeks, and have heard remarks about different cameras not converting over to a mac very well. There is so much noise out there about different Cameras. At this point, I think I have it narrowed down that I want one with removeable/replaceable memory cards, and an HD Model. Looking to spend not much over a grand for a basic starter kit (bag, filters, lens covers, chargers, etc) and camera with a 2 year over factory warrantee, with ample memory. I am driving Cross-country with my brother who is getting out of the military and want to be able to make use of the footage I get. I want a good camera that I can easily make work with the Mac editing programs without having to purchase a bunch of extraneous programs, etc.
Suggestions?

I have the Panasonic HDC-SD5 and it works well.
Be sure to pick a camera off this list:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1014

Good HD camera for FCE - Sanyo? Canon? Sony?

I'm looking for a good HD camera for FCE (1920 × 1080 pixels; no tape, no HDD--just Memory).
Is anyone here using the Sanyo Xacti VPC-HD1010?
I could only find sample videos of the older HD1000 here:
http://www.sanyo-dsc.com/products/lineup/dmx_hd1000/feature/02/index.html
Is the quality of the HD1010 better?
Or can someone recommend Canon (HF100?) or Sony?
Thanks!

Please have a look at these cutouts of your examples:
http://rcpt.yousendit.com/633305198/9a2d60f9d7f9fc6d3cb974cb9c10637f
During horizontal movements it doesn't look very good too. Why...?
I looked for other 1920 x 1080 sample movies on Vimeo, and most of them looked MUCH better than yours:
(I could only watch the MOVs and MP4s -- no MPGs, AVIs and WMVs -- where can I find the right plugins for QT...?)
========== MP4 ========== :
http://vimeo.com/2066768
http://vimeo.com/download/video:85836840?e=1228936457&h=2d7b989dcf3f726fc880a27a aadff6d1&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/877353
http://vimeo.com/download/video:50936435?e=1228955488&h=df124d3cddca933233288311 75b79139&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/874048
http://vimeo.com/download/video:50539882?e=1228955762&h=9b71b56a5f62f8eced16590f de439e7d&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/942167
http://vimeo.com/download/video:57750895?e=1228955923&h=dd160ef7e478e5be2e50ed81 058a9157&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"Camera Settings: FXP (of course), 24P, Cine. No post processing was done other than inverse telecine to get the true 24p"
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/1579639
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84938054?e=1228959874&h=0c3089fe59bb0df08a40a040 a70b197d&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"This exportation is on Sony Avc codec. Vimeo has problems with this codec upload: the message "holding pattern" appears at least during a few hours."
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/877968
http://vimeo.com/download/video:51008096?e=1228960326&h=0cc7f8fea66894ca44d96177 3aa0e7af&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"convert from MTS to MP4 with sony vegas 8.0"
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/861101
http://vimeo.com/download/video:49260260?e=1228961001&h=a1083709d6cd6bc2e48cd07d e536e317&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"1080p 30p 17MBps FXP mode - converted from MTS to MP4 with sony vegas 8.0"
PLAYS FINE!
http://vimeo.com/1514388
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84825675?e=1228962554&h=a80ca03d041ef53e919d7ea7 9ed8e744&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
PLAYS FINE!!!
http://vimeo.com/1864942
http://vimeo.com/download/video:85474329?e=1228963133&h=2573a3eb8c5ae7d576196388 802e2aaf&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
PLAYS FINE!!!
http://vimeo.com/2154180
http://vimeo.com/download/video:86001721?e=1228959239&h=cb519c4feb867880ba79a9b5 68dc7053&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
QT CRASHES!
http://vimeo.com/894341
http://vimeo.com/download/video:52665086?e=1228961606&h=2a4710fe92e4dfa00c6484ae bfef21a1&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"This was Auto W/B and 30p. I'm finding that I like 30p over 60i. Tried 24p cinema, and it just looks washed out and lower frame rate - not very 'cinema'."
("like the 30p mode better than the 60i. My preferred mode is 24i in "cinema" setting, which gives a very "film-like" look."
=> "The file is not a movie file")
========= MOV ========== :
http://vimeo.com/2378443
http://vimeo.com/download/video:86419131?e=1228958152&h=1cb1ef84ed244b96b4576ffc d90bd02c&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
"Filmed in 30 P mode, 17 Mb/sec, Auto WB (a bit off sometimes) - Imported with Voltaic, edited with iMovie HD 6.0, exported to quicktime"
PLAYS FINE!!!
========== MPG ========== :
http://vimeo.com/899186
http://vimeo.com/download/video:53171708?e=1228931308&h=df2d4c269528ffc673bc3d02 2ae3104c&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/894555
http://vimeo.com/download/video:52681869?e=1228931474&h=7a395d836a0906269c4ac3d7 eff8d00c&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1292168
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84425502?e=1228943723&h=8885d04465f053b9afc447a1 1d430766&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1520726
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84836028?e=1228962415&h=46517f95818fea61e06956f4 d6b1dea7&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
========== AVI ========== :
http://vimeo.com/1503128
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84805116?e=1228935141&h=805d18efa32ec220d7467637 f465ab1a&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1503232
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84805245?e=1228935912&h=2ea157e92bad012e97049785 e63f94af&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1106220
http://vimeo.com/download/video:74189151?e=1228942452&h=a6aae713f083231390a259a6 14ec95aa&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1503565
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84805739?e=1228957994&h=95884c6895ded635aa897780 4f257560&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
http://vimeo.com/1411052
http://vimeo.com/download/video:84641392?e=1228961508&h=743a1989a3f1ff9efc7b528c b32fbfa5&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
========== WMV ========== :
http://vimeo.com/1826169
http://vimeo.com/download/video:85400735?e=1228961889&h=98c5a8978f25f37975cbc963 d93fbef5&uh=caa1c7c9d562c96ad50ce7a8454a1de1
So the Canon HF100 seems to be a really good camcorder,
but it may be difficult to find the best export settings in FCE...?

Just wrapped a project with the F55. Good camera. Pity this place has basicaly become a selling list for it.

I bought a used F55 3 months ago for a doc project where I needed a global shutter camera and didn't want to put up with the Blackmagics. I paid 15k for it. I just sold it again for the same 15K, so basically it was a free rental. The camera was perfect for the project. The global shutter really made a difference and it is small enough for some run and gun. All together it's a very good camera. Not even close to the drag that is using a FS7.Although the F55 is not a camera I would say makes cinematic images like the Alexa or F35 and if I was shooting a narrative project I would proabably not go with it, for this project I couldn't have choosen a better camera. For anything else other than narrative I would have no problem using it again. It is very very flexible. It's a real pity that this forum has become basically a selling list selling F5s, F55s and recorder instead of discussing how to get the best out of these cameras. If not a for sale post it's generally some rant or complain about what Sony is not doing. The camera is great. Enough said.

ghupka wrote:
..not to mention that the whole concept of buying a camera for a single shoot and reselling it is more of a producer/accountant approach. Most of us who buy cameras want to use them for multiple projects over a longer term, and/or get supplemental rentals from them. It's that environment where the F-55 shines - You want 4K raw files? Sure. You want HD MPEG 422/50? No problem. Etc. etc. One camera that can shoot anything from a feature film to a news story.
Even though I have my share of things I would like to see improved, I've said before that the F-55 earned its purchase price back faster than any other camera I've owned.What if the whole concept of buying a camera for a single shoot and reselling it is more of a producer/accountant approach? How is that a problem? The reason I sold the F55 again is because I don't need it! This was a special project where it's abilities made everything easier. But for the record I also used a F3 mixed with the F55 for some shots where the rolling shutter was no problem and it cuts just fine too. If I had enough jobs that would use the F55 and no other camera would do I would have kept it. But to be honest I don't. Even this docu is being finished in HD and 4K was never even brought up. The global shutter and real pro features is what brought me to the F55 for this. But leaving it sitting in a closet till the next eventual job that would need it didn't make sense. By the way I couldn't care less if people are selling their F55. Yes, this ****** massive selling trend is what allowed me to get a very good deal on a F55 with LCD viewfinder for only 15K. From a person who wanted to get rid of it to buy an Amira. Good for me, yes. My complain is not about people selling. Is about people using this forum as a selling list. Use Ebay or a forum that has a classifieds section instead of polluting this forum with your for sale adds. Every other thread is a for sale. Just in the first page now we have 8 for sale threads! This forum is to discuss the camera. When I got the F55 it was an annoyance to look through threads for tips with every other thread being somebody pimping the camera sale. Sony, please open a classified forum and prohibit people from advertising on the normal forums, like every other civilized camera forums does. Keep things much more clean and organized.

What is the best camera for me?

I don't know much at all about cameras, so I'm really hoping someone will be able to help me! I'm looking for a camera that's better than your standard point and shoot digital camera but one that doesn't cost a fortune. I want to be able to take pictures of NASCAR cars going down the track without them being blurry. I would also like to be able to take pictures of things that are sitting still or aren't going quite 200 mph. I guess I just want an all around good camera that also has the ability to take good, non-blurry pictures of NASCAR cars in motion. I was wondering if anyone could tell me what the best camera and/or lense would be for this. Thanks so much for your help!

This is one instance where good gear helps but knowing how to use it properly is more important. Panning skills will be important, & so will choosing the right focal length of lens. I'll assume you have to shoot from the stands but don't know how far you'll be from the stretch of track you're hoping to shoot the cars along. A camera with a good AF system matched to a lens with fast AF capabilities will help too, but you could do this old school & use manual settings & manual focus too. You would set up the camera based on the lighting favoring a Tv that can freeze the car but blur the background & wheels / tires. Then you pick an ISO to allow shooting in the f8 range at that Tv & pre focus on the section of track in front of you. Pan with the car or group of cars as they go by & take a few shots while they are in the zone you've pre focused on.
If however you're really serious about it & think you'll attend enough events to justify spending the money the 7D, 1D2n, 1D3 & 1D4 are all worthy bodies for action thanks to their AF systems & frame rate. For lenses I suggest considering any of these as a starting point but again you may need longer depending on access to the action. 70-200 f4 L, or the IS version or maybe the f2.8 versions but since the 70-300 L IS seems to have both a very fast & accurate AF system it would be my first choice as a from the stands starting point. The 100-400 L would be my next addition to a motorsports kit but I don't think it's the lens I'd start with.
As for setting up a camera for action (DSLR's but some P & S may work too) I wrote an article which is a good starting point & the suggested shutter speeds for prop planes fit a rookie shooting motorsports so I recommend reading this plus use the link in my last post for another set of lessons from Canon that you should read.
http://www.rccanada.ca/rccforum/showthread.php?t=147971
As a side note I started attending R/C events to work on my panning skills so I'd be better at the track. A smooth panning swing is developed through practice & it's the key to good results, and follow through after the last shot in each sequence.
"A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."

Cameras for filming??

I recently got into FCPX and ive been filming a lot but ive noticed something that must be obvious to anyone with any sort of experience.
The camera i use does not provide good quality video.
Can someone suggest a good camera, which can record from about 100-120 feet and still look HD? I'm looking for a price range of anywhere from $800-$2000.
The cheaper the better, of course, but i need a good balance of quality and price.
Please help.

'quality' is - aside the operators abilities - determined by a few factors:
• glas, aka optics
• sensor/size
• bit-rate/codec
DSLR and System-Cameras allow a wide variaty of glasses ... a friend has a (cheap) Canon 600D with a (expensive) f1.8 optics .... wow!
The larger the sensor, the easier to accomplish DoF (if wanted!), but the higher the price. Again: you don't get camcorders with a large sensor for an affordable price, but 'full size' DSLRs kill your wallet too ....
'last years devices' often fullfill only AVCHD v1 standards - which limits on 24mbps. v2 supports higher rates, usually 28mbps for 50p/60p, or beyond (JVC PX1 has 34mbps). Again, unbeatable: non-camcorders, such as Panasonics (Russian pimped) GH2 or the latest GH3 with (official supported) 50-70mbps (that is broadcast standards). For independent film-makers, the GH2 was for a while first choice, maybe used within your price range.-
Aside budget, your needs define the model - I'm doing a) hobby b) sports = no need for low-light, ext mic etc, so a Pana hcv707(US: 700) fullfills all my musts, a 1/2" sensor, 28-700mm zoom, 28mbps, 1080/50p. got it for 380€.
The actual available 'still-cams+video' offer only v1.
Devices like Sony NEX or Nikon V1 are beyond my/your budgets .....
For 'photography', my choice would be a Pana hcv800/900/909 ... 3mos, 'brutal' good pic-quality, but close to the 1k€ range.
If money doesn't matter, a Canon600/650 (body: ~500€) , or a fullsize (body: ~2000) , plus some glases (= extra +2-3000$) ....

Good Camera for sports & action

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for