Recommendations? Point&Shoot for sports shots

[ud7747]

---------------------------------------------

Budget
* What budget have you allocated for buying this camera? Please be as specific as possible.
@up to $700

Size
* What size camera are you looking for? Or does size not matter at all to you?
@not important

Features
How many megapixels will suffice for you?
@

* What optical zoom will you need? (None, Standard = 3x-4x, Ultrazoom = 10x-12x, Other - Specify)
@Ultrazoom + (or higher)

* How important is “image quality” to you? (Rate using a scale of 1-10)
@9/10

Do you care for manual controls?
@basic simple manual controls are ok. I don’t have expert knowledge- so easy =better

General Usage
* What will you generally use the camera for?
@looking for an ultrazoom camera to use at sporting events (baseball)

* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not?
@max 8x10

Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos?
@outdoor/perhaps under awning (lower light)

Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos?
@yes.would like good highquality zoom and best Continuous shooting rate 1.5 fps 1.4 fps

Miscellaneous
Are there particular brands you like or hate?
@ no. just looking for best quality for $

Are there particular models you already have in mind?
@ doing research came across Canon Powershot SX10 IS but recently found some reviews that mentioned poor “Continuous shooting rate 1.5 fps 1.4 fps” . also just found Canon Powershot SX1 IS. Now trying to determine whether one is better. Still open to hearning of recommendations

(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD)
@ looking for longest zoom, best quality pix, ease of use for special settings continuos shooting

[jekostas]

For the budget you've specified, why not get a dSLR, even a used one? Even a couple of generations old dSLR will destroy any ultrazoom on the market for sports/low-light shooting.

[ud7747]

I really dont have the knowledge to use one.

[David Metsky]

There's not a whole lot you need to know to get better pictures out of a DSLR in this situation. Any ultrazoom will produce fair to poor photos in the situation you describe unless you learn the exact same things you need to get the most out of a DSLR. If you decide to just keep things in Auto mode the DSLR will be far superior.

[cdifoto]

I really dont have the knowledge to use one.
5 years ago I didn't either.

[jekostas]

I really dont have the knowledge to use one.

One solid week of practice and a little reading online would probably do it.

Sports shooting is one of the most demanding things you can do with a camera, be it outside in stadium, inside a hockey arena or basketball court, or in a baseball diamond. If you go the ultrazoom route, even if you're outdoors, I think you'll be very, very disappointed in the shots that you're even capable of getting.

On the other hand, with the budget you've specified, you could get a Nikon D40 with a two-lens kit, a Canon XS with a two lens kit, or an Olympus E-420/520 two-lens kit, and even on fully automatic any of those dSLRs will take better pictures than any ultrazoom camera on the market.

[ud7747]

THANKS TO EVERYONE for taking the time to lend your insight.

truth be told... I have an event Thursday (New Yankee Stadium-Home Opener) that I was looking to get equipped for.

Ya know, I was thinking, based on everyone's similar recommendations: perhaps what I would consider "great"- you all would rate as "fair" (and vice-vera). I think it is likely that your standards are much MUCH higher than mine.

For example....(please dont laugh)...
I currently have a Lumix DMC-TZ1 (2006-my FIRST digital cam), which I thought was wonderful [LOVED the zoom and picture quality] (no longer usable: recently all photos are VERY dark- almost black).

And in 2008 I picked up a Cybershot T300- just before a vacation [b/c of its slimmer design], which I was also very pleased with.

So you see, that is my digital camera history- and in light of my Lumix- kicking the bucket and my greatly anticipated baseball game this week- I was just hoping to find another decent, simplistic (higher zoom) camera. Hence, my consideration of the Canon Powershot SX10 and newer SX1.

[Honest Gaza]

UD...I used to own a Panasonic Lumix FZ-20 and thought it would be the last camera I would ever need to own. At the time I purchased it, my son was playing a bit of Rugby League each weekend and there was no problem with the focal length it could achieve (equivalent to approx 420mm in 35mm terms).

However, it's shortcomings were from the "shutter-lag". This is the time it takes for the photo to be taken in relation to when you hit the shutter button. I'm not sure if this is no longer an issue with P&S cameras....but I suspect it is.

I now have a DSLR and the difference is significant. No-one here is questioning the quality of pictures you can take with a P&S....but with "sport/action shots", the requirements are different and you will need a DSLR.

[Beowulff]

..... No-one here is questioning the quality of pictures you can take with a P&S....but with "sport/action shots", the requirements are different and you will need a DSLR.

As far as shutter-release lag goes, I'd have to qualify your assertion about DSLRs always providing shorter lag times than P&Ss.

Some DSLRs are relatively slow in this regard (0.090 for the Canon 350D Rebel XT and 0.124 seconds for the Nikon D70 ) whereas some P&Ss are surprisingly quick (0.008 for the Sony W-170 and 0.024 seconds for the Panasonic FZ50).

Although, having said that, I totally agree that for sporting events and action stuff, you can't beat a DSLR for its versatility overall.

Cheers :)

[cdifoto]

Yeah my Fuji is .028 according to imaging-resource. Pre-focused of course. Not bad but if SI ever calls me up, I'll be taking the 1D.

[stanj]

Pre-focused! That is a major precondition that a quick reaction sports photographer might not have the luxury of.
The DSLRs mentioned as being slower are obsolete models but even taking that bait, when adding AF time and frame rate, even those admitted slow DSLRs are faster by far in real world situations than any P&S, plus offer higher ISO resulting in higher shutter speeds needed to capture any action. A modern DSLR has nothing to worry about in any comparison with any P&S for action shots, or any sort of shot actually. Not only are the cameras more capable, they have equally good accessories. There is no equivalent in the P&S world to good quality light sources such as the Nikon CLS with use of remote slaves as easily used as a P&S. There is no comparison between the two worlds in lens quality.
When I read all the descriptions of camera history as told by P&S owners, it seems that they all have had many, buying new ones frequently to overcome the poor reliability or performance of whatever model they are switching from.
If they had just spend the same amount of money on a decent DSLR they would have far ahead than so many disposable limited capability P&S toys. So many posts claim this new brand xxx model xxxx is just as good as a DSLR in some aspect just keep the myths going, yet those latest and greatest DSLR killers get tossed out in a few months and a New latest and greatest is bragged about, for a few months. Camera companies love buyers like that, selling to the same people the same basic product many times instead of one purchase of a proper solution to the need once.