[SET Man]

All you're doing with a camera is capturing manipulated light... why does it need to be advanced? Excellent optics are the key and the low end Nikon stuff is no better anything else out there.

Hey!

   Dude, be careful what you say about Nikon here. There are many of theme here, they might ganged up on you

   Anyway, people use what fit their needs and for some at least to make them feel better.

Take care,
Buddy

[Bemopti123]

Hey!

   Dude, be careful what you say about Nikon here. There are many of theme here, they might ganged up on you

   Anyway, people use what fit their needs and for some at least to make them feel better.

Take care,
Buddy

I say, badmouth Nikon all ye want, as I am a Olympus man and will not switch for anything in the world.  BTW, you can also badmouth Sony, Canon and all the other ones.

[JohnR]

Buddy, "we" just want to help... you... to see the light... and correct the errors of your ways 

[ooheadsoo]

All you're doing with a camera is capturing manipulated light... why does it need to be advanced? Excellent optics are the key and the low end Nikon stuff is no better anything else out there.

Not saying it's better than other equivalent bodies, but he already has one and knows how to use it.  Why scrap it? The image quality of the D40 is just fine.  It's about the light.  On the other hand, the average point and shoot's continuous shooting mode is on the slow side for the OP's sports photography.

[adydula]

Both Nikon, Canon and others make EXCELLENT glass.

Most of this glass is probably way beyond what the 'normal' point and shoot crowd would be willing to pay for..kind of like really great audio gear.

Take a look at this site: http://www.fredmiranda.com/

and the lens review section to see the good stuff:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

A really great Canon "L" lens is just plain as good as glass technology gets. In the hands of someone who understands physics and the dynamics of light the results are indeed wonderful. But in the hands of ....well it still will be ummmm 'crap'.

My wife who shoots with a Oly P&S is a fantastic composition person, talent that always amaze me. But she is always telling me " my colors arent as good as your colors" and why cant i capture the grandkids moving around....duh remember shutter lag???

All in all PS have their place, but a low cost entry level DSLR and a decent lens...we are talking $1500 or so and it will last a life time and be able to do almost ANYTHING your mind can imagine...and add lens and lens if you think you need them etc..

I have 20+ lens, 3 DSLRs, 3 PS's and several wide formats, shoot weddings, landscapes, portraits etc...with all this crap I still find myself picking up one DSLR body and one lens 90% of the time!! Go Figure..

One way to see what lens can do is to make yourself use one lens for 2 weeks each day and take lots of shots, analyze the DOF and the results...its amazing what you can learn!.

All the best
Merry Christmas
Alex

[SET Man]

Buddy, "we" just want to help... you... to see the light... and correct the errors of your ways 

Hey!

     I'm fine thank you.

    Don't get me wrong. I do work with Nikon with the photographer I work for. On some shootings we do use both, he with Nikon and me with my Sony. Of course the clients couldn't tell the difference.

     Funny one of his closest friend use Pentex and another one use Canon. And we get along pretty well

     But if I have to switch... between Nikon and Canon, it is likely to be Nikon. Yes there is a reason for that.

Take care,
Buddy

[Wind Chaser]

I have 20+ lens, 3 DSLRs, 3 PS's and several wide formats, shoot weddings, landscapes, portraits etc...with all this crap I still find myself picking up one DSLR body and one lens 90% of the time!! Go Figure..

Is there one lens you gravitate to more than the others?

[Delta Wave]

I have 20+ lens, 3 DSLRs, 3 PS's and several wide formats, shoot weddings, landscapes, portraits etc...with all this crap I still find myself picking up one DSLR body and one lens 90% of the time!! Go Figure..

All the best
Merry Christmas
Alex

I'm right there with you man... I don't go anywhere without my trusty Minolta Hi-Matic 9 w/ the Rokkor glass... I freaking love that camera.

[adydula]

A Canon 24-70mm F2.8 L glass constant aperature is on the camera 90% of the time.

My second favorite is a Canon 300mm F4 L glass. This has such a narrow DOF and the bokeh is to die for...great when you want to isolate things and blur the background.


People think that you need lens to cover the whole spectrum, you dont...you can move back and forward lol...to some extent.

All the best
Alex

[JohnR]

People think that you need lens to cover the whole spectrum, you dont...you can move back and forward lol...to some extent.

I find that odd too. I find these days that I mostly just use my 60 (on DX). Otherwise my 300/4 or 200 macro. The only time I use a zoom is for things like speakers and the like where you just want to get the thing in the frame and there's not a lot of options for angle or moving.

[Goosepond]

I fell for the lure of the fast primes and foot-zooming.   

But eventually I gave in to the convenience of real zooms. My Canon 70-200L IS F/2.8 stays on my camera a lot of the time. I love the isolation at 200mm and the bokeh wide open at F/2.8 is mighty purty! 

Gene

[Wind Chaser]

I gave in to the convenience of real zooms. My Canon 70-200L IS F/2.8 stays on my camera a lot of the time. I love the isolation at 200mm and the bokeh wide open at F/2.8 is mighty purty! 

Same here.  Many zooms have the all the IQ of primes and then some.  The convenience out weights the size and weight advantage of primes.  Another thing is foot zooming isn't always possible.  Small primes still have their place... most street photographers don't advise pointing big lenses at strangers.

[nathanm]

Small primes are definitely the way to go.  Who could forget the commerical and marketing failure that was the Nikon Interrogator point and shoot:

[Wind Chaser]

A camera like that would make it much easier to take pictures of strangers.

[adydula]

I have a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L Is lens and when using it I find that I am constricted on the wide end to a 70mm x 1.6 = 112 mm equiv lens. Unless you have a full frame this lens is ok but if you want any semi wide angle shots or closer working distances its not the one for me.

Having 2 camera bodies then one with a 24-70 and the 70-200 is workable but a real pain with 2 bodies.

Doing photography at a wedding etc is 'real' work, with lens like these that weigh several pounds each along with bodies and exernal flash and mounts....

Its like weight lifting for a day!

All the best
Alex
 

[ooheadsoo]

My sigma 18-50 2.8 stays on 90% of the time, but I'd like to get a 35mm or 50mm 1.8 one of these days with AF.  Can't live without AF if I'm shooting an event.  If I didn't have friends with 100mm macros, I'd be dying for one of those too.  I don't need a tele zoom if i have a 100 in the bag.

[JohnR]

Who could forget the commerical and marketing failure that was the Nikon Interrogator point and shoot:

Yes, who indeed??

It does make you wonder though... what camera doesn't require you to point... and shoot... 

[Delta Wave]

Same here.  Many zooms have the all the IQ of primes and then some.  The convenience out weights the size and weight advantage of primes.  Another thing is foot zooming isn't always possible.  Small primes still have their place... most street photographers don't advise pointing big lenses at strangers.

That's on of the reasons I love rangefinder cams so much, When I'm in the city I can set it and shoot from the hip... works especially well on capturing the freak shows on the subway late at night.