Alright, I'm a reporter. I also do a bit of photography. As the world of journalism has changed over the last few years folks like myself, in small town journalism, have been called upon to take on tasks that are outside their norm; particularly photography. Luckily, I enjoy doing that part of my job. I started out with a jankity Nikon coolpix 5700, a Fujifilm S9000 and, most recently, a Canon Rebel XT EOS.
Well, anyway, I was shooting at the homecoming basketball game over the weekend and then I was out hiking on a frozen over trail and then I was snapping four or five eagles in the same tree, and I realized that I'm outgrowing my equipment. In addition, I've been asked if I'd like to sell some of my photographs, especially the sporting event ones, to the schools, to parents and to a small postcard company but I said no because it felt wrong to sell something that I didn't make with my own equipment; I felt under obligation to my newspaper. So, I just burnt a few discs and gave them away.
I don't have a camera of my own, so it's nice that I can use the Canon from work whenever I want to, but I don't want to feel obligated and I want to be a bit more serious about photography.
So, I'm thinking of the Canon 40D; it seems like a good mid-range DSLR. I love the way the body feels and, from what I've been able to do with it in the shop I think it might be for me.
I'm probably going to be using it for a whole load of things, and it seems to fit the bill, but I wanted to know if there was anything else I should look into. I would be using it for a number of things, including sports photography, so low and awkward lighting and rapid movements, as well as a lot of nature photography (considering that I live in one of the most pristine natural environments in North America and have regular access to the Tongass National Forest).
So, camera gods, what do you think?
Also, recommendations on buying are appreciated (Body Only + this lens or +that lens. Kit?)
EDIT: Also, now considering the Nikon D200.