Looking to get into Motorsports Photography Need Help

I definitely wouldn't suggest an M for that sort of work, but it's not impossible. Yes, there are easier and better cameras out there for those sorts of shots. But the constant in every camera, is the person using it. Practice will make massive differences. Mainly in number of keepers. Simply buying longer lenses not so much

Just in case the OP is still here, looking for advice...

I assume you want equipment to make the task you have in mind easier, not harder, so ignore any advice to by really old, or manual only gear...

While what will work for you may not be the same as others, it's likely that a reasonably modern body with aperture and speed priority settings and a reasonably decent frame rate will make the task easier and a much more pleasant experience.

Again, while I only recommend the 100-400L because this has been a good tool for me over 10+ years of motorsport photography, if you cannot find a decent 2nd hand one, and probably don't want to fork out for a VII (either new or used), then by all means, buy a cheaper zoom, but be aware, unless you have some good connections, it's unlikely you'll get to be track side most of the time and may be shooting from a fair distance...

My advice is not to invest too much untill you decide this is what you want to do.
EG i have shot with a 350D and Sigma 70-300 DG Macro at many car shows when i first started. I got some great shots and people seemed to like my work. The total was about £190 so like $210?
I have since upgraded.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17952960
My advice is not to invest too much untill you decide this is what you want to do.
EG i have shot with a 350D and Sigma 70-300 DG Macro at many car shows when i first started. I got some great shots and people seemed to like my work. The total was about £190 so like $210?
I have since upgraded.

On the contrary, for people to tell him that a 30D and 55-250 lens is more than good enough for shots might make him think that he will be able to get consistent, quality shots. While a professional might be able to, an amateur will certainly reap the benefits of a better focusing body and a better tracking lens.

It is important to make sure he knows what is possible with a cheap kit, but also that it will limit him. The absolute last thing anywhere here wants is for him to get discouraged by his photos not turning out well using a cheap kit, and then quitting trying at all. Especially when he would have been willing to shell out a bit more for a quality kit that would significantly increase his keeper rate.

It is important to make sure he knows all of his options, the quality possible, the quality to be expected, the upper limits of each setup, and finally the cost of each setup. This will then allow him to make his own decision on where on the hierarchy he wants to jump in. To tell him that a 30D and kit lens is all he needs, or a 7DII and 100-400 II is a must, isn't fair to him or anyone else reading this thread trying to learn.

I totally agree,

It also depends on the competancy of the person taking the photo. So many times i have had people complain that their camera isn't good enough but then they get a new camera and the photos are still crap, just higher resolution crap!.

At the same time i have also seen people that shoot with the minimal kit and get the most awesome shots i have seen.

Being that the OP hasn't replied and only has one post i'm not sure how much of this they are seeing.

My personal journey was coming from an Olympus OM1 with b/w film i wound myself. I then started using point and shoot digital cameras and finally launched into the DSLR world with a Canon 350D, 50mm 1.8 and 70-300 DG Macro. This worked for me for about 8 months -12 months. I then decided i wanted to comit more money and get a better performing camera as i had reached the limits of the 350D. I upgraded to a 700D and was again blown away with the step up. Since then i moved round and have had 5DMk2, 1D2n, 1D2, 1D3 etc and many lenses like the 100-400 L, 70-200L, 50 1.8, 8mm 3.5 etc. Finally settled for now with a Sony a6000 and 18-105G f4.

Kit is always going to be a gamble for anyone however i don't think people should nessacarily feel like they have to spend a lot to get a decent shot. Alot of good images come from 'older' cameras. Never forget, SISO...

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17953343
At the same time i have also seen people that shoot with the minimal kit and get the most awesome shots i have seen.

I see this comment all of the time. And while you are correct, you have to use it in the context. When the person is new, and asking questions about gear, chances are they are not going to be able to get consistent, quality images with a kit that most would consider outdated/outperformed. Professionals use the highest end equipment not just because the end results are higher, but as importantly because they are easier and more reliable to get them.

As the saying goes, even a blind squirrel can find a nut every once and a while. That doesn't mean I would suggest a blind squirrel to someone as a pet.

as you can see from my title, i'm quite partial to a squirril and nuts haha!

I agree it is up to everyone to make their own decision but i don't think people should feel like they have to get a 1DX and a 70-200 II IS because they shoot action sports or something.

I think there is a lot to be said for realistic expectations.

My decision to get cheap kit was to see if i would actually use it as if i didn't it wouldnt have been too much of a financial loss.

As we don't know weather the OP knows their nodal point from their f-stop i think it's hard to make a recomendation.

I was pretty happy with the 70-300 is and 1d3 combo. You should be able to get it for under 800.
The more you do it the better you will get. I am still no where near were I would like to be so I
keep practicing and learn a little more all the time.

Photo from rgfrison's gallery.

1D3 and 24-70 f2.8
VERY happy, Bulletproof setup.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wAeU​Uv

Not sure if the OP ever decided on what to do.

In any event, I am still a newbie when it comes to photography. I did much as some people suggested, and picked up a rebel with a cheaper 300mm zoom lens. I freaking hated it because I saw it as slow, soft, etc. That camera and lens was sold less than 3 months after purchse. Knowing what I know now I wouldn't recommend any rebel series camera when a good used 7D can be had used from a reliable seller here on the forum for $500 or less.

Now the question becomes what lens to pick up. Not much info was given by the OP and all he ever posted was one post. Simply said wants to take photos of the customer's cars. What kind of photos? On track performance, or more close up photos of body work, engine work, driver in car, etc. I think most people assumed it would be on track shots, but I also know a great many here take amazing pit shots, close ups, and other various shots in and around pits. The two require totally different lenses, though equally amazing shots can come from anywhere at the track. (I've seen shots of cars being unloaded that I wouldn't hesitate framing)

So we can give lots of advice, but until the OP stops back in and lets us know a bit more detail, we were and are all swinging blind.

mikeinctown wrote in post #17989680
Not much info was given by the OP and all he ever posted was one post. Simply said wants to take photos of the customer's cars. What kind of photos? On track performance, or more close up photos of body work, engine work, driver in car, etc. I think most people assumed it would be on track shots, but I also know a great many here take amazing pit shots, close ups, and other various shots in and around pits. The two require totally different lenses, though equally amazing shots can come from anywhere at the track. (I've seen shots of cars being unloaded that I wouldn't hesitate framing)

So we can give lots of advice, but until the OP stops back in and lets us know a bit more detail, we were and are all swinging blind.

Actually The O.P. gave plenty of details, here is a quote from the original post " i plan to do lots of moving shots at track days and alot of still shots of our cars and customers cars i don't care what brand, or if its new or used just want the best bang for my buck trying to stay under 800 for body/lens."

In other words both on the track and static shots and also try to stay under $800 for body and lens. With that in mind I gave a recommendation for either a used 50D or a 7D and either a used 70-300mm USM I.S. or a non stabilized 70-200 f4 L and a TC.

None of that matters as the O.P. posted once and never came back.