[PeanutWing]

Recommendations? Should I save up more

[blueminishooter]

You will definitely need more than $300. Paintball photography, or photography in general, is more expensive than playing paintball itself. You need a solid body and at least 2 good lenses for different shots. If you're looking to stay cheap, hit the Canon T3i up. Great little camera that takes awesome pictures. But then you will also need a lense with it and such. If you're not planning on taking video, you could just snag a T3 and save a few bucks, but in my opinion, take the T3i because the one time you want video you won't have it..ya know? Just my 2c worth.

-C. Robbins

[Kermit]

Canon 10D is going for under $200 now. That will get you a great, high end(just older) body that is going to last forever and it has a very good lens with it.

http://www.ebay.com/...=item3f1223197a

Try and find something just like this kit and you will be very satisfied with your purchase. I shoot with a 10D all the time.

www.joshunruh.com if you want to see my work with a 10D.

[Nobben #44]

Used Nikon D40 or D70 might do the trick.

[Kermit]

Nobben #44, on 10 January 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

Used Nikon D40 or D70 might do the trick.

Nikon Fanboy

[Nobben #44]

Kermit, on 10 January 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

Nobben #44, on 10 January 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

Used Nikon D40 or D70 might do the trick.

Nikon Fanboy

Look who's talking.

Canon Fanboy.

[Kermit]

Nobben #44, on 10 January 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

Kermit, on 10 January 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

Nobben #44, on 10 January 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

Used Nikon D40 or D70 might do the trick.

Nikon Fanboy

Look who's talking.

Canon Fanboy.

Proud of it too!

[Nobben #44]

How do you think I feel when I see people getting slow shutter speeds and ISO grain indoors and I just put my ISO to 2500 and get neither.

[Kermit]

I shoot with an f1.8 almost all the time, I've never had that problem

Besides, for $300 you won't be getting amazing ISO performance.

[Nobben #44]

Is your 1.8 a telezoom?
Didn't think so.

and try shooting sports in low lightning in f/5, you'll need a high ISO.

[Kermit]

Nobben #44, on 11 January 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

Is your 1.8 a telezoom?
Didn't think so.

and try shooting sports in low lightning in f/5, you'll need a high ISO.

Regardless, for $300 you aren't going to find something with amazing ISO tolerance. If I had better ISO tolerance then I wouldn't have to shoot f1.8, but it isn't a problem.

I shoot with a 50 f1.8 prime most days, and I have shot paintball with it. Not ideal, but it worked fine.

For those of us on a budget, something I don't think you have to follow quite as tight as most of us, you can't go for a camera with uber high ISO performance.

[blueminishooter]

Stig watch out! Kermit is a pro! lolololol.

[Nobben #44]

Kermit, on 11 January 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

Nobben #44, on 11 January 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

Is your 1.8 a telezoom?
Didn't think so.

and try shooting sports in low lightning in f/5, you'll need a high ISO.

Regardless, for $300 you aren't going to find something with amazing ISO tolerance. If I had better ISO tolerance then I wouldn't have to shoot f1.8, but it isn't a problem.

I shoot with a 50 f1.8 prime most days, and I have shot paintball with it. Not ideal, but it worked fine.

For those of us on a budget, something I don't think you have to follow quite as tight as most of us, you can't go for a camera with uber high ISO performance.

Never said you'll get a camera with high ISO performance for under $300.

But I'm pretty sure the D40 has a better ISO tolerance than a 10D, don't quote me on that though.

Regardless, why recommend a Canon instead of a Nikon and vice versa?
For $300 a used 10D or D40 are great cameras, two high quality SLRs for a low price.

You are a Canon user, so you'll recommend Canon.
I use Nikon, so I'll recommend Nikon.
This is a discussion that will NEVER end, you and I both know that.

The whole ISO thing is really just to spare him from buying new lenses when/if he decides that a High-end consumer Canon doesn't have the ISO tolerance he might want.


But in the end, you can't really go wrong between Canon or Nikon.
Let's leave it at that and let the OP decide if he want's a Nikon or Canon.

[Kermit]

I agree. Nikons are more for portraits, canon's really focus on sports, but you can have amazing results with either one and the differences are marginal.

[Nobben #44]

The fun thing is that I shoot more sports than anything with my Nikon.
I have only done a small portion of portraits, usually for girls in my class.

[Kermit]

I do a good balance of either

Anyway, to the OP. You can get a great start up kit for this price if you go for an older, used model.

[Nobben #44]

Kermit, on 13 January 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

I do a good balance of either

Anyway, to the OP. You can get a great start up kit for this price if you go for an older, used model.

Yup, nothing wrong using a D40 or a 10D instead of one of these new cheap cameras.

[Kermit]

Build quality and ergonomics are going to be miles better too

[Nobben #44]

I think Nikons feel more rigid and solid than Canons.
And I'm not alone about that, I know some 7D owners that are very jelaous on my D7000.

But, there is a big one here.
The 10D looks more solid than the D40.
And with cameras like that I don't think there are any major differences.
I think the biggest difference between the two brands are more in that category known as the "Prosumer" class. Those cameras that are just as good as a pro model but lack some basic treats the pro models have.

[Kermit]

10D, 20D, all the way up to the 50D are super solid cameras. The 60D really stepped down to a more intermediate level, and the 7D kind of took over that line of prosumer cameras.. They aren't as sturdy as the Nikon D7000 because they aren't the same material, but that's not their sports level camera.

Go up to a 1D and you could drive nails with that body.