Cameras

[devilsadvocate]

Light makes a HUGE difference with a digital. (My ISO only goes up to 200 and at 200 they come out very grainy)
I cant even take photos at Elizabeth night games and hardly bother on low light winters day.
Its all practise, I initally had to take 200 shots to get 40 decent photos, these days I can usually get 40 decent photos from 45 shots but I do delete as I go in quiet parts of the game.

Some of that is the lens itself, which may limit the light gain achievable with ISO adjustment. Light gathering gets sacrificed for compactness.
My old Sony Cybershot F707 has an f2 lens, whereas f2.8 or even f3.5 are common. That does make the lens larger than the camera body though.

Thanks fellas. A mate showed me this website: http://www.dpreview.com which has some great reviews and info about cameras. Fair to say I've learned a packet in the last few days.

ISO speed is a limiting factor in your point and shoot digitals, as is the aperture. The SLR's I'm looking at have ISO speeds up to 1600, but at those speed, the images are very soft and grainy, which I guess is a result of lack of light. I'd love to be able to take crisp action shots at night games, but the $'s involved is too prohibitive, but I guess it'll be an upgrade from the Sony.

Psyber, you must have spent a fortune getting an f2 lens. I'll be getting f3.5 as I can't afford anything smaller.

[Psyber]

Light makes a HUGE difference with a digital. (My ISO only goes up to 200 and at 200 they come out very grainy)
I cant even take photos at Elizabeth night games and hardly bother on low light winters day.
Its all practise, I initally had to take 200 shots to get 40 decent photos, these days I can usually get 40 decent photos from 45 shots but I do delete as I go in quiet parts of the game.

Some of that is the lens itself, which may limit the light gain achievable with ISO adjustment. Light gathering gets sacrificed for compactness.
My old Sony Cybershot F707 has an f2 lens, whereas f2.8 or even f3.5 are common. That does make the lens larger than the camera body though.

Thanks fellas. A mate showed me this website: http://www.dpreview.com which has some great reviews and info about cameras. Fair to say I've learned a packet in the last few days.

ISO speed is a limiting factor in your point and shoot digitals, as is the aperture. The SLR's I'm looking at have ISO speeds up to 1600, but at those speed, the images are very soft and grainy, which I guess is a result of lack of light. I'd love to be able to take crisp action shots at night games, but the $'s involved is too prohibitive, but I guess it'll be an upgrade from the Sony.

Psyber, you must have spent a fortune getting an f2 lens. I'll be getting f3.5 as I can't afford anything smaller.

I think it cost me about $1500 from a wholesale source in 2003. It is 5mpxl and has a 7x optical zoom Zeiss lens, plus 10x digital. Nobody seems to be making fixed lens jobs with that size lens any more. The big drop in DSLR prices has probably helped squeeze this type out of the market too. It can also take infra-red night shots in black and white, or use infra-red framing then pop up the flash automatically for colour shots at night.

My wife's Canon PS S3 iS is an f2.7-3.5 depending on zoom, but it is 6mpxl and 12x optical, and more compact. She chose that primarily because the view finder set up and location worked for her and the zoom is fast - neither of us are keen on framing our shots from a flat screen.

[devilsadvocate]

I finally got an SLR.

I went for the D60 as it's more entry level (because I'm a complete numpty) and less than half the cost of the D90. It came with an 18-55m kit lens giving zoom of around 3x, which I've since discovered just does not cut the mustard as a walk around lens. I also forked out for a 70-300m zoom macro lens which is AMAZING. It's not great at night due to a slowish aperture rating, but in daylight it's unreal.

The current plan is to sell the 18-55m lens and upgrade to the 18-105m lens, which is the kit lens that comes with the D90. The net cost to upgrade is around £60, so I'l still way in front. That will provide zoom of up to 5.8x, meeting my walkaround reach requirements, and overlapping beautifully with the 70-300 when I want to get real close.

After a trip to Egypt, I'm bloody happy with the camera and the image quality over my bridge camera. It's worth every penny.

Thanks for the advice earlier too lads.

[Wedgie]

I look forward to seeing your pics DA, Im always jealous of people with SLRs.