Might also note that burst mode is irrelevant if you can't get an AF lock on the subject before it becomes "uninteresting"..

Ex. there's a fairly short time you have to identify, compose on, and AF lock on a fielder before he catches a ball. AF speed is sort of handy here. So is having a long effective focal length. So, for that matter, is having a fast aperture because you'll be working with short shutter speeds. A long, fast burst of tiny out-of-focus tiny figures isn't normally interesting...

Do you have any recommendations for cheaper lenses for any of the cameras I listed? If there was a great lense available for not a lot of money it could be the tie breaker, since the pros and cons seem to balance out eachother in most other categories. I've never had to buy lenses before so I only know the very basics of selecting them...

Sounds like you could really benefit from more research and searching the forums here. Sports requires fast glass. Indoor sports like basketball requires even faster glass. Are you prepared to spend the kind of money necessary for great IQ?.

I mean, sports (especially if indoor at nighttime) is right up there w/ music concerts as some of the toughest subjects to handle..

Sure baseball you could get great images w/ a 70-200 f/2.8 IS/VR/whatever. That's about $1600 in one lens. Sure you'll want 3 fps shooting or better. Fast AF speed in body and lenses. f/2.8 aperture or faster. Maybe an 85 f/1.8 or 30 f/1.4 for basketball..

I'd say you'd likely spend over $2000 USD to start for your needs. Easily. Think about it if budget is an issue. I'm not trying to discourage you, but it is a big step up in price- and also in results (image quality)..

What about a light meter? Grey cards? hot soe flash? Tripod/monopod? filters? lens bag/camera backpack? even more flash mem cards if you're shooting RAW? extra battery? post-processing software? RAW conversion software? Noise reduction software? lens cleaning/sensor cleaning kits?.

Cheers.Davidmy flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodesma/..

I understand that in my price range I will not be getting anything near professional images, this is just a hobby of mine. At this point I really need to stay under $700 for camera + lense. Again, I know that that is low and I'll need to drop a couple thousand for really good pictures, but that's how much I have right now, and I'd like to expand to SLR. An SLR will give me better pictures than what I'm using now, as well as the extra flexibility, I was just wondering what in my price range is the best value...

Chuy1530 wrote:.

I really need to stay under $700 for camera + lense..

Your choice is prolly determined by the limited options. Maybe a Canon Rebel, or Pentax K100D. Neither of which I'd recommend. If you start enjoying this, you may want features you'll need to upgrade for. Making a camera like a D80 or 30D or K10D even that much more expensive when you consider your initial dSLR as part of that cost. I'd say $700 is unrealistic.

Consider the other accessories I listed or you may need?.

You will undoubtedly have to use a kit lens in this price range. No way could you shoot indoor basketball at nighttime. I think you'll be very limited in soccer or football on the long end. Even OWNING a 200mm length in your price range would be tough. Maybe old manual focus, used....

A good 18-135 Nikon kit lens would be the closest I'd say you might get on a D40. Again, I don't consider the D40 a great option (personally). Many others do/might. YMMV. Using an f/2.8 I am pushing ISO 2000 at 1/320 sec in some gyms. At f/3.5 or f/4.5 you'd be...

In trouble..

Best of luck.Cheers.Davidmy flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodesma/..

As someone said you have to more research..

If you are thinking pentax k100d with the kit lens, then consider adding the pentax 50-200 lens. you then would have something that could take indoor sports shots. but you would have to run the iso to 1600 to makeup for the fstop on the lens. there are many people who have this combo and are very satisfied..

I suggest asking/reading on the pentax dslr forum for the k100d.same on the nikon dslr forum for the d40/d40x/d80.same on the canon dslr forum for the xti..

Also check other websites for other reviews so you get a balanced opionion...

Cheap lenses tend to be ~f/3.5-5.6 or worse. This is not the sort of thing you'd like for low-lit fast-moving sports..

This seems particularly true for Pentax. If you look at their present line-up, you'll see that it's heavily concentrated in focal lengths suitable for portraits, but fast AF telephoto zooms useful for sports are relatively few and not cheap...