1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!


Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by KevinmH9, Nov 22, 2007.

  1. KevinmH9

    KevinmH9 Active Member

    Hello everyone! Brand new to the forum, actually my first posting too. Any who, I'm an inspiring college student looking to get into sports journalism out of school. Currently I work as the Assistant Sports Editor for my college paper and have served as writer, Sports Editor and Assistant Features editor in the 2 1/2 years I've been working there. I've found using the tiny little cannon camera that I have provided to me by the newspaper more of a nusance than a help - the quality of the pictures don't provide much gratification either.

    What would you all suggest as a decent, yet inexpensive camera (lens too possibly) where I can expect to get some crisp and quality shots from the field? Thanks!

  2. I'm definitely inspired.

    Anywho, try this as a starting point:

    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  3. KevinmH9

    KevinmH9 Active Member

    Awesome looking camera! I figure with a decent lens that'd get some excellent shots. Would you happen to know what exact camera it is? I'd like to check online and see the price ranges. Thanks!
  4. Canon 400D. There's higher, more expensive models but I hear this is a solid little camera in the $500-$700 range, I believe.

    The photographers on here should have more reliable advice.
  5. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Nikon D-100.
  6. HoopsMcCann

    HoopsMcCann Active Member

    law school
  7. pseudo

    pseudo Well-Known Member

    Although I do lust after a friend's EOS 5D, I was thinking Rebel XTi myself, since all my old 35mm gear is Canon. (And I do mean old - A-1 bodies, none o' them fancy-schmancy autofocus lenses.)

    Is the 400D the next step up, or just another name for the Rebel?
  8. I don't know. I've got the 500D and never had any problems. A friend had the 600 and that came with all the bells and whistles, including a voice recorder. I've always just heard the 400 is a good place to start, or go on to the 500 if you got $800 to $900.
  9. Tom Petty

    Tom Petty Guest

    post. of. the. day.
  10. Canuck Pappy

    Canuck Pappy Member

    I'll echo the D100. It's all if known for the past 4-5 years, but it has been a workhorse for me. You can get a used one for a good price.
    I also recommend, if you're shooting sports, a fast lens. Something like a 85/f2.8.
  11. Platyrhynchos

    Platyrhynchos Active Member

    I asked the same thing a little more than a year ago on this board.
    UT Shooter did not hesitate when she suggested Canon Rebel.
    It has been a solid camera. I have zero complaints.
    UT shooter knows her stuff.

    Edit to add: She also recommended a 50-200 lens. It, too, has been great, with the exception of when you obviously need a wider angle lens.
  12. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Workhorse, indeed. I took upward of 1,000,000 shots on mine during 3-plus years, through extreme conditions (many times in the same night, from brutally cold mountaintops for ski jumping, into a steamy gym for hoops, back to hockey rinks). Great camera, and yes, you should be able to get a used one on the cheap.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page