They are both nice cameras. The 30D has 3200 ISO which is better for shooting at night. It is one stop faster than the 400D. The 400D is a bit lighter. Read the reviews for both cameras at the site below. Canon has a rebate on both cameras now. The rebate is doubled if you purchase two qualifying products.

You will need a fast lens if you plan on shooting night football (like an F2.8) and if you buy a zoom, the fast ones are expensive. You could always go with the 85 mm 1.8 and crop the photos if you don't have a big budget.

You will like either Camera.

Here is a link that might be useful: DP Review

If you are going to crop, then I would go with the 10MP 400.

Joe

I am looking at these lenses. 70-200 2.8 or the 75-300 and I don't know the aperture of that one. also where can I go to find out the prices on these lenses? I looked at Canon site but they don't give me the prices. I plan to buy these in Fargo and but would like to know the prices before I go there and inquire about them.
I looked at all the reviews but no one says anything about night time pictures.

Check em out here. Bill

Here is a link that might be useful: B&H

When you are saying night time pictures, what are you expecting?

I will be going to high school football games at night and there will be the lights on at the field. I want to be able to take pictures, not right from the sidelines but farther away. I want to zoom in some or be able to crop later and still see the player good. Will I be able to do this? With my Kodak 4690 the pictures are really dark and there is so much noise after I lighten them. I have two good programs to work with after I put them on my computer.

June,
The 70-200 F2.8L is probably Canons best zoom and very highly rated. It is razor sharp at all focal lengths. I use it for indoor hockey and basketball. I have not used it for night football but many people do. It is expensive but the good Canon lenses hold their value very well. Try Beach Camera or B&H as someone else suggested. The 70-300 is F4-F5.6. At 300mm it is F5.6 and would not be fast enough for night football. Canon also has a 200 F2.8 fixed focal length which is very highly rated at about 1/3 the price.

The link below is a sight where many lenses are reviewed and rated. It will be invaluable in your search for good lenses.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

tooltime is 100% correct, an aperture of F5.6 simply does not allow enough light to enter the lens. Someone mentioned ISO3200, Canon or not, that's a high ISO to be at and noise will be an issure. However, at F2.8 it will be less of an issue since you can be at a lower ISO. I dont think you will be satisfied with the 70-300, you will keep kicking yourself for not spending the extra $$$ for a lens capable of doing what you really want it to do - night time shots.

Another thing about those indoor gym shots, your main battle there will be the white balance. Shoot RAW if you can. If you must shoot jpeg I would suggest downloading Adobe's beta software "Lightroom" it has magnificant white balance manipulation for jpegs.

Also, I would suggest learning the proper technique for changing lenses. Diry sensors will be an issure if you are not careful, FYI.

Keep us updated.

Joe

Tooltime,
what is the difference between Canon's 70-200 F2.8L and the 200 F2.8 fixed focal length?
My situation. I am a 75 yr old grandamother, with my youngest grandson who is a HS sophomore, and I love taking pictures, working with the pictures,etc. I can't spend a lot on the lense, so am looking for the best lense at the least price. I know I have to spend quite a bit but I have my limits. Also what about the Sigma brand? I really appreciate all your help....June

F2.8 is the aperture.
70-200mm is zoom of the lens. You can adjust the focal distance of the lens

200mm fixed, also called primes, means you can not zoom in or out. The focal length is always 200. The 200mm might be lighter, assume there are less glass elements since it does not have to move.

Prices, I see that the IS is going for about 1500-1700 on ebay. Where as the non-IS is going for about 1100.

Sigma is signiicantly cheaper. I dont know much about their 70-200 F2.8, sometimes they make great lenses and there are some you should stay away from...Okay I just search for reviews about this lens and it seems that people really like it.

I don't know you current level comfort with holding a camera and the lens, but you might want to invest in a monopod for support.

I leave to someone else now that know more about these lenses since I dont own either one, good luck

June,
If you are buying the telephoto lens to mainly shoot your grandsons sports from the bleachers, you will be at the 200mm focal length all the time so the fixed focal length would work for you.
Some of the Sigma lens are very highly rated. The Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM is a very nice lens at less than half the cost of the Canon Zoom but it doesn't have IS (image stablizer) which helps make sharper photos. The Canon 200mm prime doesn't have IS either.
In your case, I would go with the Sigma zoom or the Canon 200mm f2.8 prime along with the kit lens 17-55 kit lens.

The link below has three photos just taken with the Canon 30D at ISO 3200 to show you that ISO 3200 is usable on this camera. As Joe Pointed out, there is more noise.

Dave

Here is a link that might be useful: My Zenfolio Site

Thank you everyone for all the help you have given me. I have learned a lot. I think I will go with the EOS400D and get the Sigma 70-200 2.8 lense. From my research I think these 2 will do what I want them to do. If not I will still have a good camera and lense to take my other pictures at basketball and softball.
Hopefully you are going to see the pictures I took with my Kodak 6490. I am up in the stands and I did zoom in about 10 to 15X. These of course were taken during late afternoon.
June

Here is a link that might be useful: Web shots

I see they can't get the whole album up for you right now so I am going to put in just one picture of my grandson, #4. and see if that will come up. As I said I am up in the stands at the 50 yard line and zoomed in a long way.
June

Here is a link that might be useful: Web Shots

Me again. If you go to Web shots try hitting "My shots" and then albums and you may be able to get in.
Also, have another question...What is the difference on these lenses when they say......IS USM and just USM?
June

June, had the links posted incorrectly, here you go

Here is a link that might be useful: CLICK ME

I used the ones they put up for me to use but apparently I had to go with all of my albums at once. they have changed things and I thought it would be such a great deal...........thanks,Joe.
June

IS means image stabilizer. USM is the ultra sonic motor for focusing.

It was stated from the top of the bleachers to across the field, I take this to mean a football field, Two hundred MM is not enough.

My Vote, is Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens

I would suggest reading the recommendations. Bill

Here is a link that might be useful: Canon

The 100-400 f4.5-5.6 is a nice lens but it won't work for night games or in gyms. It's not fast enough. She needs an f2.8.

She specified night time shots, f5.6 will not allow enough light through the lens to stop motion.

We are all have our opinion the One to four hundred is mine, The four hundred is just to much for most of us to handle cost wise.
Canon USA
Telephoto EF 400mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens. Price : $ 6,599.95

There are a lot of Pros out there using the 100-300MM lens for these same sports. Two hundred MM is not making it from across the field and up in the bleachers. f/2.8 in a big lens is beyond most peoples means. It is easy to get hung up on f/2.8 if you have the bucks.

When I try to post here I get the idea IM walking on someone's turf with the reception I receive. I guess this is why this forum is so slow. There is only one opinion. Well, digger

I can't help but to chuckle at this. I didnÂt even remember who you were until until your last sentence, and then I recalled another thread where someone was hypersensitive and then the name clicked. YouÂre so touchy, Bill. I hope that you are not referring to me, I was in total agreement with you in the last discussion you were part of. No, not everyone is out to get you, or argue with you. You seem to become insulted whenever others state their opinion. I donÂt believe anyone is here to argue. Oh well is rightÂmuch love to you Bill.

I believe the SIGMA 70-200 f2.8 was the last lens inquired about. It is a fraction of the cost compared to the canon. . Is 200mm going to limit the op? Maybe, but to a very, very small degree. From what I can tell of her previous shots, she is not in the nose bleed section, nor is she selling her pictures to SI. True, the 400mm would be a lot better, cÂmon - 6.5K? I guess thatÂs why they get paid to be at the game and I pay to watch.

I do not think you read a thing I said Joe, I never recommended the 400 f/2-8. I was pointing out the price of f/2.8. And I have never accused you personally of anything.

I recommended the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens. And I still do. It will do about all that is asked.

I would not ever recommend at any time for anyone to limit themselves to a 200 mm lens. F/2.8 does not change the fact it is still only a 200 mm. I just don't think it is an overall Sports lens.
And that is what the request was aimed at. Clam Digger