Which camera - Part 2(Indoor sports use)

[troop]

Ok, a bit ago I posted a question about what camera would suit my needs for indoor sports action and just general photo taking. My sports photos would be of indoor basketball in a well lit, yet artificial light gymnasium at distances of approx. 10-30' away(20%). The other 80% would be general photo use and I don't anticipate any long range type photos of scenery. I'll take it again from here using the questionaire..

Budget

* What budget have you allocated for buying this camera? Please be as specific as possible. Probably no more than $600 street price but realistically in the $500 range.

Size

* What size camera are you looking for? Or does size not matter at all to you? Looking for a bridge camera so I don't really need the camera to be a compact,

Features

How many megapixels will suffice for you? 6mp would probably be enough as 75% of my prints are either 3"x5" or 4"x6" with the other 25% being 5"x7".

* What optical zoom will you need? (None, Standard = 3x-4x, Ultrazoom = 10x-12x, Other - Specify) For indoor light/sport needs, I'd probably need a minimum of a 10x optical with wide angle prefer over zoom.

* How important is “image quality” to you? (Rate using a scale of 1-10) I'd probably want 8+ on 4"x6" size prints

Do you care for manual controls? I'd expect to need them so yes

General Usage

* What will you generally use the camera for? 80% general family pix(bithdays, Vacation with a 50/50 mix of indoor/outdoor and indoor sport photos.

* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not? Probably no more than 5"x7"

Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos? I plan on this camera being able to take nice indoor b-ball photos.

Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos? See above but I wouldn't consider b-ball photos fast compared to auto racing type pix.

Miscellaneous

Are there particular brands you like or hate? Guess I've been considering Fuji or Panasonic but open to others

Are there particular models you already have in mind? Some that come to mind are Fuji S5200/6000 or Panasonic DMC-zf7/fz50. These are based on reviews I have read but don't really know how they apply to my planned photo useage ??

(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD) Wide angle prefered over telephoto. Not sure if a camera rated at iso 800/1000 would be adequate or if I'd need 1600 for the indoor sport shots ? I have read alot of positive reviews but never really see any that take indoor sporting photos ??

[Vich]

For that budget, get a used Digital Rebel 300 (that's the original Rebel). I've been seeing them for $300 or so. Then probably a Canon 85mm prime lens and a monopod. I've had difficulty using prime lenses for sports because your DOA for the very close-up or very far away shots, but for indoor sports, I think 85mm (on a 1.6x crop) would fit most shots from the distance you mentioned.

The trade-off (up-side) for using a prime (that's a lens that does not zoom) is that it will collect a LOT more light (like 3 times). That's really valuable indoors. This lens is also probably oneo f the top 10 lenses in Canon's whole lineup for image quality / focusing performance combination. There's a reason that a lot of pros use this lens to cover pro basketball.

Alternatively; you could get the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 ($300 used). It's focusing accuracy and speed may not be up to the task, but Image Quality is superb and the f2.8 will give you more light then the cheaper alternatives.

This would put you around $600 (well, plus the monopod).

You want excellent high ISO performance, fast and accurate focusing, very fast lenses (ie: small f-stop rating, like this f1.8), and instant shutter release. Also; if they allow flash, you want the ability to use an external flash (or at least have a very powerful built-in).

There are better alternatives, but they're all way over your budget.


It really sounds like you're wanting a digicam, but you won't get very good ISO performance (anything above ISO 200 is generally grainy, except the Fuji's that can be used at about 800). Also; the shutter release will be nearly unusable. They say "half-press to pre-focus and shutter release will be nearly instant", well that's useless in sports, and it's still too much delay to be much use in fast moving sports.



Good luck!

[cdifoto]

I wouldn't get the 300D since it doesn't have AI Servo unless you hack it. Perhaps a bargain condition 10D and an 85mm f/1.8. Over budget but probably the only good and affordable basic setup for indoor basketball. Sports of any kind are a challenge, and an expensive proposition to photograph.

[tim11]

Get DSLR if you can.
For PnS, I wouldn't consider FZ7 for indoors sports - for amateur purposes; that is. S5200 is cheapest candidate.
FZ50 will surely have the speed and for small size prints and image it may be good enough.
S6000 will surely will give you the cleanest images non DSLR can offer, but whether it has the speed of the FZ is another matter.

Personally, I'd go to the shop and test the S6000fd.

[troop]

I do want a digi camera for its movie mode and lcd screen view finder. I see the max aperture for the Panasonic DMC -fz50 is F2.8 - 3.7 while the Fuji S6000 is 2.8-4.9. Is this really a huge difference for low light, indoor pix ? Thx, Troop

[cdifoto]

I do want a digi camera for its movie mode and lcd screen view finder. I see the max aperture for the Panasonic DMC -fz50 is F2.8 - 3.7 while the Fuji S6000 is 2.8-4.9. Is this really a huge difference for low light, indoor pix ? Thx, Troop

You won't be able to successfully capture action with an LCD screen. There is too much lag. Add the shutter lag to that and you'll be a good 2-3 seconds behind every shot you want.

[John_Reed]

You won't be able to successfully capture action with an LCD screen. There is too much lag. Add the shutter lag to that and you'll be a good 2-3 seconds behind every shot you want.
If you had to live with LCD lag and shutter lag as bad as you say, you wouldn't be able to capture shots like this:

http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/75791446-L.jpg

Those birds weren't even airborne for more than 3-4 seconds, so your numbers don't quite apply. I took the shot with my Panasonic TZ1, with a "Red Dot Sight" attached. Using the RDS, the LCD is ignored, so that goes away. And for the TZ1, shutterlag is minimal to non-existant. Here's a photo of the TZ1 with RDS mounted:

http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/69003475-L.jpg

I've used the same rig for sporting events too, though as yet I haven't attended any indoor events, which the OP is looking for. But the concept works fine, and zeroes out the effects of LCD and shutter lags.

[cdifoto]

If you had to live with LCD lag and shutter lag as bad as you say, you wouldn't be able to capture shots like this:

http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/75791446-L.jpg

Those birds weren't even airborne for more than 3-4 seconds, so your numbers don't quite apply. I took the shot with my Panasonic TZ1, with a "Red Dot Sight" attached. Using the RDS, the LCD is ignored, so that goes away. And for the TZ1, shutterlag is minimal to non-existant. Here's a photo of the TZ1 with RDS mounted:

http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/69003475-L.jpg

I've used the same rig for sporting events too, though as yet I haven't attended any indoor events, which the OP is looking for. But the concept works fine, and zeroes out the effects of LCD and shutter lags.

Hate to tell you but basketball is faster than that. And it's indoors where lighting is worse making it more difficult to focus & track.

[Clyde]

I took the shot with my Panasonic TZ1, with a "Red Dot Sight" attached. Using the RDS, the LCD is ignored, so that goes away. And for the TZ1, shutterlag is minimal to non-existant.

It is amazing that any sporting event lets you use your red dot sight. Since the red dot is associated with guns in the popular imagination, it is easy to imagine it having a disruptive effect on the sports you are "shooting(?)".

Clyde

[troop]

I hear alot about noise issues with Panasonic cameras yet if things were that bad would they even sell ? I ask because I wonder if noise would be an issue if I generally would shoot pix in the 3:2 mode of 3248 x 2160 or 2560 x 1712 ? I don't need/want the 10mp ability(5-6 is great) but the low light, indoor sport catching ability.. Troop

[John_Reed]

It is amazing that any sporting event lets you use your red dot sight. Since the red dot is associated with guns in the popular imagination, it is easy to imagine it having a disruptive effect on the sports you are "shooting(?)".

ClydeWell, there's a little LED "beam" that creates a spot in the middle of the front lens of the sight, but that's as far as it goes. It isn't beaming at the subject, doesn't even get beyond the end of the sight!

[John_Reed]

Hate to tell you but basketball is faster than that. And it's indoors where lighting is worse making it more difficult to focus & track.
No kidding! :( The point of my post was that one doesn't have to live with LCD lag, and shutterlag itself is way under your stated "2-3 seconds" I was making no claims for shooting sports indoors, though, I'll grant that you need higher ISO to successfully capture sporting events indoors.

[cdifoto]

No kidding! :( The point of my post was that one doesn't have to live with LCD lag, and shutterlag itself is way under your stated "2-3 seconds" I was making no claims for shooting sports indoors, though, I'll grant that you need higher ISO to successfully capture sporting events indoors.

I didn't say shutter lag was 2-3 seconds. I said shutter lag + lcd lag is about 2-3 seconds.

[John_Reed]

Same difference, you were inaccurate either way. But that's OK, don't take offense.

[cdifoto]

Same difference, you were inaccurate either way. But that's OK, don't take offense.

Shutter lag isn't the same as LCD lag. If you believe it is, you don't know how cameras function. And yes, it can be 2-3 seconds or even more. That doesn't even include autofocus delay that happens with ALL cameras as well. Every camera on the planet suffers from all three. Some are just better than others, with the top end DSLRs and great lenses being the quickest.

[Vich]

Catching the action. You really need to try it some time.

Even 1/2 second delay is an eternity. Having to pre-focus is a joke. In fact; "Instant" is usually not enough unless you're really good at predicting, panning, aiming, focusing, exposure, etc. etc. Anything less than what a DSLR offers will give you nearly all useless results. They'll be blurry, under exposed, missed moments, etc. Of course; DSLR results will produce a lot of that too, but at least you have a chance.

One other critical thing a good DSLR brings is rapid consecutive shots, like 3FPS or 5 fps (or more). That's a great way to catch that exact shot you want. Point, predict, then hold that button down for 10 shots.

Also; ISO 1600 will not be uncommon at all.

I'd listen to CDI. He's shot his share of sports. A lot of bird shooter types just don't appreciate how fast things happen with athletes until they try it. A P&S for indoor basketball, sigh.

[troop]

Geeeeez, I was hoping a newer updated bridge-type camera ( Fuji S6000, 5200 or Panasonic DMc-fz50) would hopefully have the technology to maybe do this. It's amazing how a friends 4 yr old 12x optical Toshiba captures indoor sport images in auto mode...

[Vich]

Geeeeez, I was hoping a newer updated bridge-type camera ( Fuji S6000, 5200 or Panasonic DMc-fz50) would hopefully have the technology to maybe do this. It's amazing how a friends 4 yr old 12x optical Toshiba captures indoor sport images in auto mode...
It may be a question of what you'll be satisfied with too.

Some guy was making claims of that 6 months back posting photos of "Pro" Wrestling. Mostly; they were the posed shots (not action), and even they were fuzzy and dark. But he was happy with them so, oh well. You sure couldn't publish or mount any of them without serious compromise, but if he was happy then that's enough.

My original point is, go to a game and give it a try. Then you'll see. If you don't find yourself saying "this $%#@ed delay, I'm gonna throw this thing in the dumpster!" then you're a calmer fellow than I.

[troop]

I'm gonna try and negotiate a price with the local camera company on either the dmc-fz50 or s6000fd. I have a 10 day return policy locally but really don't wanna pay msrp on a camera. I'm sure they'll discount but I won't know how much till mid week. I'm trying to determine from current owners or older models (s5200/dmc-fz30) what might have the better lower light, picture catching ability in a well lit gynasium ? I've looked at/handled both and the Fuji "feels nicer" but that means nothing if the Panasonic works better indoors... Thx for all your input... Troop

[cdallacosta]

Stay away from the panasonic

Just look at the reviews to see what iso 200+ pictures look like

If you must go with a non-slr camera, try the fuji s9600... it can go iso 400 with quite reasonable quality, and even 800 may be OK to you. It lacks image stabilization, but IS is useless in you case since it can´t freeze a moving subject.

If the S9600 doesn´t do the trick, though, I guess you´ll have to go DSLR... I´m getting a Pentax K100D, it´s amazingly cheap for what it offers, perhaps you should look into it.

[Vich]

I'm gonna try and negotiate a price with the local camera company on either the dmc-fz50 or s6000fd. I have a 10 day return policy locally but really don't wanna pay msrp on a camera. I'm sure they'll discount but I won't know how much till mid week. I'm trying to determine from current owners or older models (s5200/dmc-fz30) what might have the better lower light, picture catching ability in a well lit gynasium ? I've looked at/handled both and the Fuji "feels nicer" but that means nothing if the Panasonic works better indoors... Thx for all your input... Troop

This was why I recommended the original DSLR for $300 used + a good lens. Even without the Servo Auto-Focus (that's where the focus keeps updating as the subject moves) your results will be WAY WAY WAY better than the Panasonic FZ-anything.

If you can afford the better, go for it, but otherwise, the original Rebel 300 will KNOCK THE SOCKS OFF what you've proposed.

However, if your real motivation is to have a handy and compact camera that'll do very well in perfect conditions, will have a big zoom, will take OK shots at parties (not too good mind you) and the zoo, etc. then the ultra-zooms will suit your needs well.

Best to get it where you can return within 15 days with no fee because after your first basketball game you may just regret the purchase.

[qmudder]

I have had a panasonic dmc-fz20 for almost 2 years and I mainly use it for indoor sports. one of my children is in karate and the other is a competative gymnast. both very fast action sports. I love my panasonic and I have a friend with the 8 mp canon rebel xt which also takes great picture but they weren't any better and maybe not even as good as my panasonics until he invest over another 2grand for a better lens. I really love the rapid succession function and think that this is indespensible when shooting fast action sports. My children also ride dirt bikes and Quads and have taken some okay photos of them riding buy but haven't had as much luck with them. so I would definately recommend either one os these cameras but if you are on a budget I would say go with the panasonic. I might recommend the fz30 over the fz50 though because it takes 3 compared to 2 rapid succession photos.
Good Luck