Digital cameras forum: Which DSLR brand and model

I can't see the initial post by the OP on any thread, just see the replies.

The 75-300 is the worst telephoto lens that Canon still makes. If you had the 70-300IS USM then it'd be a different story. If you had some nicer lens then I'd stick with Canon, but I think you can look at other brands.

I couldn't agree more with drborchers reply.

I moved from a Nikon 35mm film camera to nothing but Canon digital point-n-shoots, to a Canon 40D, but had been looking very hard at the Nikon D80.

For me the most important aspect was how well the camera fit into my hand and in my instance the 40D was better balanced and arranged than was either the Nikon D80 or D300.

Get out there and try a bunch and see how they feel. The one that most feels like an extension of your hand will likely serve you best as you'll greatly enjoy working with it.

For indoor action shots, the most useful telezoom is 70-200mm f/2.8 with image stablization. The 17-55mm range is too short for close up shots, unless you can get very close to your subjects. I typically stay some distance away so as not to distract the children from their sports. If you use 17-55mm lens, then you will end up doing some significant cropping.
Here are a couple of my photos to give you some perspective, using the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, at 200mm:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/hjfok/CA%20Dodgers%20Team%20Photos/IMG_7819.jpg
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/hjfok/2008%20Travel%20Photos/BeijingOperaAcrobats.jpg (this one is cropped and taken at ISO 1600, using an older camera Canon 30D, handheld, so there is some noticeable noise).

If you use 17-55mm lens, then you will need to crop a lot more and end up with even more noise. Here is a photo taken with the same camera at the same ISO 1600 using the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/hjfok/Stage%20photos/IMG_2741.jpg
And after cropping, it has noticeably more noise:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/hjfok/Stage%20photos/IMG_2741_1.jpg

Nikon has the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, and Sigma has the 70-200mm f/2.8 without image stabilization. Both are excellent.

If these are still too expensive, then the Canon 100mm f/2.8 can be considered. But you should look at fast lenses at 100mm or longer focal length for indoor action, unless you routinely take your shots closeup.

I understand what you're saying in the post. But the original post mentions interest in taking indoor photos of children doing gymnastics, so the 70-200mm lens is better suited for that purpose. Obviously the 17-55mm lens suits what you need, but not what most people need for a sports lens. Therefore I add a post to address what the original post may need, it is not meant as a reply for your post. And I definitely do not imply you choose the wrong lens. The choice of lens depends on what you try to shoot.
As for the problem of high ISO noise vs getting adequate speed to freeze action, I think most photographers will rather have a photo with more noise and able to freeze the moment of peak action, rather than to have a blurry photo with less noise. You can fix the noise problem using softwares like Noise Ninja. There is nothing you can do to salvage a blurry photo. So don't be afraid to use high ISO, crank it up if that's what you need to get a shutter speed of 1/250 or faster. And if your lens has IS, then turn it off when mounting the camera on a tripod, some IS will act weird and make the photo blurry when mounted on a tripod. Monopod may be okay to keep the IS on since the camera may still be slightly unsteady.
As for the high ISO/low noise performance, most current D-SLR CMOS sensors are pretty close, whether it is Canon or Nikon. Some difference is due to camera processing. Use RAW if you want to maximize image quality. However, as you have stated, getting a fast lens is still the most important.
There are different opinions about third party lens. Using original manufacturer lens will have the best performance. Some third party lenses do not autofocus as fast as the manufacturer lenses even the specifications may look the same on paper (which is the case for the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 when compared to the Canon or Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8). For action photography, that can be critical, and can be the difference between a sharp vs soft image (with a higher percentage of keepers for the manufacturer lens). For landscape and still photography, it may be harder to notice performance difference of a third party lens. So if you can afford it, I will recommend getting the manufacturer fast lenses. But if budget is limited, then getting a third party fast lens is much better than getting a manufacturer slow telezoom.

Here is a side by side comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos450d%2Ccanon_eos40d&show=all

So the 40D has ISO 3200, faster 6.5 fps, among other minor differences. They both have the same size CMOS sensor (the MP difference is negligible), same image procesor DIGIC III and similar 9 point AF (though the 40D has a slightly better performance).

Getting a fast lens with aperture at least f/2.8 or large will be far more important than the performance difference of these 2 camera bodies. If you have a slow tele lens, the AF will be slower and the camera keeps hunting for the focus, which will eliminate any advantage of a faster fps. The ISO 3200 is noisy, but at least can help to freeze the shot in challenging lighting condition. However having a faster lens will be better than shooting at higher ISO.

For the Canon 55-250mm IS is a kit tele and costs about $255. The next step-up 70-300mm IS lens, a decent but slow mid range tele, costs about $550. The Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 is much faster and costs about $800. So you can definitely apply the $400-500 savings to get the Sigma fast tele, which is superior to the other two slow teles.

So I will suggest you get the XSI and Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 rather than the 40D and a slow tele. And this Sigma lens is also great for portraits. It is not as good as the Canon or Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 but it is still a very good lens, you will not regret it. I will not get the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8, since reviews have reported significantly slower AF, which will be very annoying for action photos (and beats the purpose of a fast telezoom).

Here is a link to the Sigma lens review:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_70-200_2p8_n15/page6.asp

And here is some user reviews:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=533555&is=REG&si=rev#anchorToReadReviews

Your current lens inventory should have a negligable impact on your decision, since it really won't be that useful in a gym without a flash. And indoors sports is all about the lens.

I currently use a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 DiII XR on a Canon Rebel XTi body for shooting high school winter guard groups in basketball gymnasiums. These groups prohibit flash like the gymnastics groups do.
I primarily do shots of the entire group for the leader to self critique their performances, but also can get in close enough when sitting in the first few rows to get some isolation shots.

This lens has been highly touted and won several awards. It gives optical quality comparable to the equivalent Canon lens typically selling for over twice as much. The focuser is not USM, so it is louder, and it doesn't feel as expensive as the L-series, but the proof is in the performance. In that regard I have been VERY happy with this purchase.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/289-tamron-af-17-50mm-f28-sp-xr-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-canon-test-report--review
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

Since third party lenses are available in a variety of mounts, you can go with whichever body you want to. For indoor sports, I would look at who is currently the leader in low noise/noise reduction at high ISO settings. Not only in camera, but in their processing software as well. When I bought my XTi a while back, Canon was, but the D90 may be a bit better than the XSi. I don't know how the new T1i lines up in that respect but it is about half the price as a 50D and shares a LOT of features with it.

Thanks to all who have replied, I have been struggling with this for over a month now. I am definitely on a tighter budget than a couple of the posters. I was looking at a 40D or 50D, for whatever reason I like Canon, my 35mm SLR took some awesome pics and my current Canon point and shoot does very well too. Like some of you stated, I think Canon and Nikon sensors are extremely close based on the reading I have done. It looks like I may lean towards a Rebel XSI and put the $400 to $500 savings towards a good/fast lens! Any thoughts on a XSI .vs 40D from the Canon users?

Sorry for the double post.

The thing to remember about Tamron lenses is that as far as autofocus goes they are reverse engineered for each camera manufacturers bodies. This means they should work well with bodies that were already out when Tamron released the lens. Because they don't actually license the technology from the camera makers, there is no guarantee of 100% compatibility with the newer bodies. I would be careful to buy the lens somewhere I could return it when putting a lens released in late 2003 (the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di) on the D90, a body released less than a year ago. I'm actually surprised we haven't seen an updated DiII version of this lens by now.

There are at least 2 reviews that notice subpar autofocus performance of the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. For an action lens, AF accuracy and speed are the most important, but Tamron seems to have the worst performance when compared to Canon, Nikon and even with Sigma. Its still images have high quality but most people bought this type of fast tele for action photos rather than portraits.

Here are two reviews:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-70-200mm-f-2.8-Di-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_70-200_2p8_c16/page5.asp

And this is a Nikon user opinion about the Tamron lens, again slow focus in low light is the main weakness of this lens:
http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00QfnB

The very reason why people pay extra money and sacrifice their shoulder to get a fast tele to be able to capture low light actions. And the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 seems to have failed this very purpose.