Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Welcome to the Hog, cwmoss.

BuckeyeBilly Loc: St. Petersburg, FL

CW,
It would be helpful to know how much photo-taking experience you've had, what camera you currently own and are familiar with, and what your budget can afford.
Since none of those things are known yet, probably a good superzoom, aka bridge, camera would be adequate for taking long-range photos like you've described. There are some good ones out there and you'll be able to take photos in pure auto mode (if your experience is only with point-and-shoot cameras) all the way up to full manual where you decide what aperture and shutter speed to use.
Many on here are recommending the Canon SX50, which is a pretty decent one, and you can get a refurbished one from Canon for a lot less than retail...and the good thing about Canon is that it also supplies you with a 1-year warranty, making this about as good a deal as a new one.
The Canon website for refurbished cameras has not changed much since before the holidays and many of the ones listed are still out of stock, including the SX50. But, I suspect that will change by this coming Monday, February 1st, so bookmark this link and keep referring to it to see when supplies will be replenished. BUT, if $370.00 is not too much money for you, the step up to the SX60 with an even longer reach than the SX50 is available right now. I'll give you both links so bookmark them for future reference:

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/refurbished-powershot-digital-cameras#facet:&productBeginIndex:36&orderBy:11&pageView:grid&minPrice:&maxPrice:&pageSize:&

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/powershot-sx60-hs-refurbished

If you want to see what else is out there, here is another link that compares the current popular ones:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/sx60/vs/nikon/p900/

cwmoss Loc: Geneva, Fl

Thanks Peter for the snarky comment, just kidding, and thanks for the good advice. I'm currently getting a bit of tutoring from a granddaughter who is a photography major and has offered to help me get good at taking quality photos. She recommends a Nikon and has lots of good things to say about the brand but has not been too eager to advise me about lenses, I guess as we get further into the process of educating me she will have some helpful advice.

Most of the cameras I have looked at are in the price range you suggested, lots being new bundles on eBay with lense packages that include up to 70-300 mm lenses. Not sure that is a good choice on something as pricey as a new camera. Your thoughts?

Thanks again.

cwmoss Loc: Geneva, Fl

BuckeyeBilly

Thanks for the links, I will look into those. My photo taking experience is limited to point and shoot up untill now so I will probably stick with that. Since I won't be submitting any of my photos for professional review or photo contests, unless I get lucky and take an award winning shot of some kind, I will just be building an album the grandkids can look back on some day.

PhotoMan1929 Loc: Virginia, USA

Peterff gave the best advice so far. You will not get good results UNLESS you know basic optics and the fundamentals of photographic technique. Spend many thousands on equipment, it will all be wasted if you do not know how to use it effectively.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Welcome to the Hog!
I suggest the best GoPro made, a drone and flying lessons!!
That should do it!! LoL
SS

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Thanks, Peter, for saying what I would have.

Once the OP has an understanding of what does what, and why, what to rent or buy will become clearer.

Notice I said rent... Do that before you buy, to avoid buyer's remorse!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I would LOVE to see what a bull thinks of a drone! I doubt the bull RIDER would like to find that out the hard way, though...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Consider a Micro Four-Thirds camera with a 100-300mm zoom. That provides a field of view similar to a 200-600mm zoom on a full frame camera, or a 150 to 450mm zoom on DX or APS-C. You get a lot more reach with a lot less weight and bulk.

Panasonic and Olympus are the brands. Either brand of lens fits on either brand of body. The Panny GX8 and GH4, and the Oly OM-D EM-1 and EM-5 II are the best of breed.

If you go APS-C, the Canon 7D Mark II is a safe bet, as is the Nikon D7200. The new Nikon D500, coming in March, is supposed to be Nikon's "7D Mark II killer".

You can find video reviews of these cameras on YouTube, and you can find Internet reviews of them at http://www.dpreview.com .

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I shoot a lot of Western sporting events and for the past five years have been using a pair of Canon 7D cameras... much of the time with a 70-200mm lens on one of them and a 300mm lens on the other (and other lenses in my camera bag and car). I'm currently upgrading to Canon 7D Mark II cameras.

Gymkhana barrels, 300mm lens...


Hunter-Jumper, 70-200mm lens (140mm)...


Trail Trials, 28-135mm lens (47mm)...


For fast action shooting, you need camera and lens combo with quick, high performance auto focus. The AF both has to lock on almost instantly and be very good tracking movement.

Canon 7D-series cameras have a lot of customization tweaks, to set up the AF for best performance shooting various types of action. To do this, they inherited a lot of features and technology from the top-of-the-line, pro-oriented Canon 1D-series cameras. The 70D, T6i and T6s all use an AF system that's similar to the original 7D's, slightly simpler but still pretty much up to the task.

About the most accurate and consistent way to shoot action with any of these is using Single Point (manually selected and usually the center AF point), AI Servo focus mode with Back Button Focusing. There are also some techniques using multiple AF points (Zone Focus, Expansion Points, etc.) 7D-series have the most of those options (aside from the very expensive 1D series).... 70D, T6i and T6s have somewhat fewer... but more than a lot of other general-consumer and entry-level models. The older Canon 60D, 50D, 40D and T5i, T4i are pretty good too, but even simpler so will tend to be a bit more restricted to using the center AF point only for most action.

You then need to complement the camera's capabilities with fast focusing lenses... Canon's USM are, for the large part, pretty hard to beat. Many of them are quite fast focusing... Canon 70-200 zooms and 300mm lenses included. Also, the various 70-300s with USM and both the Canon 100-400s. For closer shooting or somewhat wider shots, 24-70, 24-105 and 28-135 can serve pretty well. Some of the "crop only" Canon EF-S lenses such as the 17-55/2.8 and 15-85mm also have high high performance USM focus (but a lot of EF-S lenses don't). All of the Canon cameras will do better with f2.8 or faster lenses, but that's not always practical (and a lot of the lenses mentioned aren't f2.8... Those tend to be bigger, heavier and often a whole lot more expensive).

IS or image stabilization isn't mandatory when shooting action, because a higher shutter speed is often needed anyway, in order to freeze the action. However, on telephotos like all these IS can be handy for a lot of other things, lets you use slower shutter speeds handheld for other purposes, and it also serves to stabilize the image in the viewfinder, which can be very helpful when trying to follow fast moving subjects.

Canon and Nikon both use lens-based stabilization that will helps with what's seen in the viewfinder (other systems with in-camera, sensor-based stabilization typically don't help this way). I should mention that many Nikon shooters feel, and there is at least some evidence to show that their VR stabilization slows down auto focus slightly. Having used various stabilized Canon lenses for about 15 years, I feel the opposite is true with their IS... that it helps AF perform better. I don't have any real evidence, but it just makes sense to me that a stabilized image would be easier and faster to lock onto and track movement.

All the gear I use is fairly large and not particularly lightweight... doesn't meet your requirements in those respects. I also don't worry about or hesitate to change lenses, either. After all, being able to interchange lenses for different situations is one of the key points of an SLR camera system!

I shoot with Canon and know that system best... That's why I've mentioned it in detail above. This is not to say it's the only choice, though. In fact, I'm sure there are similarly good choices in the Nikon system, in particular. Pentax, Sony and Olympus also have some interesting offerings, although their systems aren't as extensive and comprehensive as Canon and Nikon's. I've worked with other photographers and taught students who have successfully used all these systems.

Oh, and "shooting from a couple football fields away" is going to require a massive lens! I'd suggest you "zoom with your feet" and get a bit closer... or look for something that can be mounted in the back of a pickup truck! :roll:

For example, this was shot whole lot closer with a rather big 500mm lens with a 1.4X teleconverter, on a heavy duty tripod. All together about 20 lbs of gear...

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

It's great that you have a mentor in the family. Nikon is a great brand (I use Canon, but nothing bad to say about Nikon), but having something in common with your grand daughter has many things to recommend it.

If you give us a price range you are willing to consider, the Nikon experts here will be able to advise on precise equipment. I think the main thing to take into account, and this could be a good discussion with your grand daughter, is how challenging your desired subjects are.

You are essentially looking at sports and wildlife photography, fast moving subjects, from a distance with limited lighting. That is hard to do which is why I mentioned the $30,000 amount, although $5,000 is probably more realistic. Also, that equipment although excellent is still hard to use and is unlikely to meet your weight / transportable / lens changing desires.

Burkphoto's m43 suggestion could be an excellent approach, although probably not Nikon in that case, but that isn't so important, his recommendations are usually excellent.

Amfoto1's advice is almost always excellent also. Basically, what you are looking for is quite hard to do well, so the equipment matters, as does the knowledge and experience. Be prepared for a learning curve and some disappointments. This is harder than taking pictures of flowers in the back yard, and can't be solved with money alone. If the detail of what Alan posted made complete sense to you, then following his advice is well worthy of consideration. If on the other hand, it caused you to ask "what was that about, or why?" then you aren't ready to follow his excellent advice yet. Maybe sometime in the future.

Good, luck. We have an idea of what you wish to do, and the budget range would help us help you.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

Welcome, CW.

Based on what you're planning to shoot, I'd say a superzoom was a good choice, as well as a decent tripod. .

There'll be some folks who advise you to buy a complex DSLR and a long lens, but, to me, that's kind of like telling someone who might like auto mechanics to buy a complete set of tools. It doesn't make sense until you've gotten your feet wet.

Consider the superzoom the price of admission. In a year, if you love this stuff, then you may have outgrown it. If you do, then that's the time to start thinking about more gear.

Just another thought, or two. Eventually, if you do love this stuff, you'll accumulate a lot of pics that you somehow are going to have to manage and edit. At that point, not now, I'd suggest you look at Adobe Lightroom. Also, if the superzoom you select can take both RAW and JPG photos at the same time, that might be a good choice, because initially you won't have to edit at all (you'll have the JPG's), but if you start getting drawn into this stuff, the RAW files will be there to edit when you are ready. And, if you never get there, you can always erase the RAW files. I don't think the aforementioned Nikon P900 supports RAW, though.

Perhaps others can recommend one that supports both.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

This is probably the best advice you can get - as a newcomer to digital photograph - I wanted a DSLR - but really could not afford one or the 2 or 3 lens to go with it - I was directed to a bridge camera - much like this Canosx50 - I NEVER ever regretted buying it and Using it quite a lot for about 8 yrs before I moved up to a used canon DSLR kit. - yes I do have a Canon sx40 that still gets a lot of use because of it's Zoom capability.
There are several advantages to this SX50:
Small but packed full of modern computerized modes
All kinds of lens capability from very close up to very long distance as well as the very important "Image Stabilization" almost to the point of not needing a tripod except for a few "Always use a tripod" shots that are not included in your defined use.

I came back to edit my post after reading your reply about your grand daughter and the Nikon cameras - YES - Nikon does make a great Bridge/Super Zoom camera also - My first one was Panasonic Lumix FZ17 and then moved to Canon.

Harvey in the Sierras

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Great information. Nice reality check.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

My advice is to forget evrything you have just read and come over to the dark side PANASONIC!! Why? because its the right thing to do