Ol' Frank Loc: Orlando,

I use a D90 and the 70-300 lens. I added an 18-55 lens to cover most applications. Also have a Kenko 1.4 telextender and can do most everything that I want. Recently bought a Sigma 18-250 and with the same telextender, I can leave everything else at home and not change anything. You have so many possibilities that I would be somewhat more confused than I am usually.

coco1964 Loc: Winsted Mn

In low light situations the D90 definitely takes a backseat to the D7000..............

Dbez1 Loc: Ford City, PA

Agreed, but it is beyond her stated budget.

coco1964 Loc: Winsted Mn

Right now at B&H she can pick up a refurbished D7000 body for $689.00 and a new Tamron 18-270mm zoom for $449.00. That comes out below her limit of $1200..........

Dbez1 Loc: Ford City, PA

How does the Tameron compare to the 2 Nikon lenses? Also, how heavy is it? Would she want to carry it around on vacation etc. I'm not disagreeing, just wondering. The 7000 would be worth the extra $300 to me.

61jhawk Loc: Tarrant County, Texas

Any good quality dslr will do what you are asking for. The important thing is to really learn how to use it - all of it. I suggest you go to a camera store and ask for advice, try out what they suggest and the take a couple of extension classes at one of your local higher education institutions to really learn how to shoot a dslr. I use both a Nikon d90 and a Nikon d300s with either an 16-85 or an 18-200 lens for sports. I have been shooting a long time but when I switched to a dslr from film I started taking night classes on how to shoot these cameras. So far I have taken 6 of them, all 6 weeks long so let me again urge you you to take at least a couple of classes.

jennihunnicutt Loc: So. Indiana

Well, to everyone who has been kind enough to take the time and give me advice on cameras and lenses, here is what I ended up with. I decided to start on the lower end of my budget and stay under it since my twin boys are in their senior year of college! I went with a more beginner level camera body, mainly because I got it with a kit that came with 2 lenses. So I got a Nikon D3100; 14.2 Megapixels, full 1080p HD video, NIKKOR 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 and NIKKOR 55-200 f/4-5.6. I added a memory card 16GB, 80MB/s, 2 lens UV filters, camera bag and a 3 year warranty for around $770 at Best Buy. Thanks again for all of you help. As soon as I get going I will post some pics!

coco1964 Loc: Winsted Mn

I use it as my walk around lens and hold it for up to 8 hours at a time W/O any problem. The lens she has are basically kit lens which are at the bottom of the Nikon line and why carry 2 lens when you have it all in one and get away with always changing lens. The 18-55 is essentially worthless for shooting baseball or any sport for that matter. I'm on field level in the press box and wouldn't consider using that lens. None of these lens are going to cut it in night time sports and then she's looking at a 70-200mm, 2.8 lens which may be a weight problem for her. I can only speak for myself but it is a heavy SOB and it gets heavy in a short time of carrying it. I guess she has to get into a camera shop and put a 2.8 lens on if she is dead set on shooting at night and see if she can handle it comfortably. That being said I'd grab that D7000 for $689 and she can always check out lens once she has the body. That will give her a better feel of what 2.8 zooms weigh and if that's the route she wants to go............

jmsibert Loc: Colorado Springs

Ok here's a general explanation for you on the lenses. The 18-105 or 120-400 designation is the focal length and has to do with the zoom capabilities of the lens, not necessarily how much light it lets in. I will add though, that longer lenses generally do let less light in, because they are gathering light from a smaller field of view. What makes much more difference is the maximum aperture value. This is also called the f-stop number, and for shooting in stadium or indoor court lighting, you want a maximum aperture value of 2.8 or smaller. Unfortunately as has been said, these are usually pretty pricey. For shooting in broad daylight,though, f4 is plenty with stops to spare. I shoot soccer in both day and night situations, and I often shoot at f8 during the daytime since that is where most lenses perform best. I use a very inexpensive Sigma 70-300 mm ($150) for this with great results. At nighttime and indoors where I shoot basketball and volleyball, I never use any f-stop higher than 2.8. The Tamron 70-200 mm f2.8 is pretty good and a whole lot cheaper than the authentic Canon or Nikon versions ($800 vs $2500). For a body, I use a Canon Rebel T4i which I love. It shoots 5 frames per second at 18 MP resolution and can handle up to ISO 1600 without significant noise problems. I don't have any experience with Nikons, but I'm sure there are comparable models on that side that won't break your bank too. You can spend twice, three times, ten times that on a body for a few more features like faster burst rates and focusing capabilities, but if I were you I'd spend the bulk of your money on lenses, not a particular high-end body.

Hope this helps.

D-Train Loc: Bend, Oregon

Not a bad setup at all Jenni! At least you will figure out a lot about digital photography for now by using that camera. You can always upgrade later. I still think there will be times when you want to zoom in more than you are able to with only 200mm but with an extender you can save some money. Try it and see! And feel free to come back here and ask us questions. We like helping out pretty ladies! :lol:

jennihunnicutt Loc: So. Indiana

You don't know how much I appreciate all of the help and advice given! I cannot wait to get out and see what I can do! I have much to learn and I am taking the advice of watching tutorial videos and/or going to some training. I never even thought that much about an extender but I will definitely check them out as I get started! Thank you again! You are too kind!!!

Alan1729 Loc: England UK, now New York State.

As you can see from the replies this was a very divisive question guaranteed to bring out all the religious fervour and allegiance to the preferred brands. There is for sure some good advice in there even if you have to have deep pockets. Some very nice wish lists too. When I started my photography I had something similar to a box brownie and then I either borrowed from friends and a local photographic store cameras and lenses buying used when I found something I felt comfortable with until I knew where my photography was going I then started to upgrade. I now buy new mostly because I now can afford it. Ask any real photographer and their story will be similar if they are honest. I also noticed that many seemed to ignore your original question “what would be best for sports photography”. This begs more questions some of which were asked, what kind of available light, how close to the subject can you get ( not too close because you said photograph through fences or nets) and how large do you expect to reproduce the pictures. Also how much time do you want to put into learning the photo technology. I'd consider what you want to do with photography if it's mainly to get some super pictures of your kids and friends I'd probably choose a bridge camera first it's only a few hundred to save some money you could rent a camera and try it out to see how you get on with it before you buy. Even though I have two camera systems I was tempted by the fz200 to use as a knockabout but didn't I used one of my old system cameras instead. You have to know that no one camera or system will do everything. Most sports photographers I've seen carry more than one camera with lens attached but most important is position you will mostly see the pro's as close to the action as possible.

redpepper Loc: Central NY

I shoot my sons track and field events indoor and outdoor. You need different lenses for different venues. In track and cc, the suns position changes as you scurry to get a shot in the woods, around the bend or your athlete I backlit with the sun behind them dependent upon where say the jump pit or home base is at a certain time of day.

I own a crop sensor dslr that allows lenses that are meant for full frame sensors to gain extra reach in magnification. For example, my 70-200mm becomes a 300mm at the long end when mounted on a smaller ( crop) sensor body. My canon body has a burst rate of almost 5 frame per second. So you need to be able to capture sports with fast shutter speed to freeze action and fast frames per second.

When choosing a lens, a lot of the time the games are late afternoon where the sun sets early in the Northeast and your available light diminishes quick. Courtesy to athletes ask that no flash is used, so you need a lens that can pen its aperture wide aka 2.8. These fast lenses can let in more light than middle of the road lenses that can open u to only 5.6. That's where the expense is... My 70-200 is a 4.0L ( professional) lens that coste $1,300 alone. This lens is not the best for indoor sports but I bum my ISO u and tweak the images in post recessing to fix the exposure.

I know this is long, but Sony has a camera with interchangeable lenses that can handle low light without breaking your bank acct.

Robert R Loc: Indianapolis and Naples

Best of luck with your sports photography, and for your sons professional career. You will find the best is to just start taking photographs. The beauty of digital is the ability to immediately see your results and make needed changes. Be sure to take as many frames per second as your camera will allow, you can always delete the bad ones. Bob, Naples, Florida and Indianapolis.

jennihunnicutt Loc: So. Indiana

I am looking at a Vivitar 3 set extension tubes: 13mm, 21mm, 31mm. Is this something that I would benefit from and be able to add it and use with the 55-200 lens? Will it give me good shots when I am about 100 ft. from the action I am shooting? I don't want to waste even a small amount of $ if there is something different or better for my bucks.