Entry level DSLR

http://uk.shopping.com/xPF-Sony-Sony-Alpha-DSLR-A100K-10-2-Megapixel-SLR-Digital-Camera-w-Sony-Zoom-DT-18-70mm-f-3-5-5-6-Lens-Kit

Is this any good? I've seen the whole kit for under £300 at ASDA and it looked nice and compact. I'm looking for something to deal with Formula One photos and the like. I've got a nice Fuji bridge camera at the moment but the 21x zoom is a bit limiting for some shots and the Sony jobbie takes Minolta A lenses so I can get a couple to do the jobs I need.

It does look like quite an old model having been released in 2006, so I would have expected it to be even cheaper than £300 to be honest.

For sports photography you want as high a fps rate as possible and 3fps is as slow as I've seen on a DSLR.

Cheers Al. I'll check I didn't link the wrong model but, assuming I didn't, I'll write that one off as a no-no.

You can pick up the Sony A200 (the update to that model) for just over £200 if you look around and wait for special offers.

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk is very handy!

It would appear thet the A100 is genuine Sony and the A200 was made after they bought the Minolta works, and is therefore a much better camera. I shall make further enquiries but, complete with a basic lens kit at under £250, it seems an ideal choice for what I'm after except it's still 'only' 3fps from what I can make out.

Thank you both.

Strangely though, if you step up to the next level Sony, the A350, the frame rate drops to 2.5fps.

I have the A200, and really like it, played around with the entry level Nikon and Canon, and the Sony just felt better in the hand.

(caveat is that I know nothing about cameras!)

Sony often run cashback deals as well, so worth looking round for those

Strangely though, if you step up to the next level Sony, the A350, the frame rate drops to 2.5fps.

Frame rate is only one consideration. The Canon 5D was a "budget" full-frame body, only shoots at 3fps and it's autofocus is nowhere near as fast as the 1D-series, so lousy for sports. It's designed to get the most out a controlled studio environment where things aren't as rushed. The 5D mark 2 is only a little quicker at 3.9fps.

Even the top of the range 1Ds MkIII with a price tag of about £4000 is only 5fps. The fastest DSLR in the World is the 1D MkIII which costs about half a much and has double the speed.

If you want a fast sports body for not very much money, try looking at the original Canon 1D. They should be available for not much over £300 on eBay, built like a brick outhouse, shoot at 8fps, still has a larger sensor than most DSLRs on the market now and compatible with Canon EF lenses which is their current range. Bear in mind that it did originally come out in 2001 so only produces 4.15mp images (2496×1662), has a tiny 2" LCD screen which you can't zoom in on, pretty bad noise at high ISO compared to modern cameras so best suited to bright conditions. I can send you links to footy pictures taken on the original 1D.

Stretch to £7-800 and you can get the 1D MkII which overcomes all those negative points I just raised about the MkI.

Of course, don't forget that a 300mm f/2.8 lens is going to set you back about £2500.

Yeah, er... Screw that.

This is actually a very good buy at the price.

http://www.eos-classifieds.com/index.php?a=2&b=2963

5fps so not a full on sports body but still pretty rapid. That particular model was released at the beginning of 2006 so no more than 3 years old.

I borrowed one of these for a gig at the Guildhall and was quite impressed.

I am just about to order the A200 from Amazon - £245 right now. I have a Minolta Film SLR that my Grandfather gave me when he retired from press photography and the Sony range will allow me to continue using the lenses.

This is actually a very good buy at the price.

 

http://www.eos-classifieds.com/index.php?a=2&b=2963

 

5fps so not a full on sports body but still pretty rapid. That particular model was released at the beginning of 2006 so no more than 3 years old.

 

I borrowed one of these for a gig at the Guildhall and was quite impressed.

Not bad that, but I'd have to factor in even the cheapest of lenses just to have something usable. Given that I'm just an amateur visiting one or two race weekends a year I think I ought to hold back the spending a little. Also, it helps that I can predict the position of an F1 car pretty well (with the shutter delay on a normal Digital camera) so anything that speeds up the response time even a little has to help.

Not bad that, but I'd have to factor in even the cheapest of lenses just to have something usable. Given that I'm just an amateur visiting one or two race weekends a year I think I ought to hold back the spending a little. Also, it helps that I can predict the position of an F1 car pretty well (with the shutter delay on a normal Digital camera) so anything that speeds up the response time even a little has to help.

You can get a cheap and nasty 75-300mm for about £100 these days. In fact, I took delivery of a 1.4× teleconvertor today which I'll use with my 70-200mm so my 75-300mm has just been made redundant.

http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.203-7144.aspx

or

http://www.dixons.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/024224

That 30D was ideal as a beginner's sports body and given the lack of regular visitors to that site and the speed with which it was sold tells you just how cheap it was.