Hi Jessica,
Happy to help, if I can. Yes, is a bit confusing the options at first when you start out. I have not written much about
gear on the tutorial page. Here goes quickiee...

Back long time ago when I was starting out. I hung around the local camera store and kind of picked the salesman's
brain. Even back then in the film era (before digital)...Nikon and Canon were the main brands of choice. But
actually my first body was a Konica and then with an adapter, I put a Nikon zoom lens on it! Cost was always a
factor and still is because photo gear is expensive, no getting around it. Anyhow...just need to say there are other
brands that can work in the early stages (Olympus, Pentax, Konica-Minolta, Fuji). But like was with me in the
beginning, you kind of will gravitate toward one of the two that most press guys run with (Nikon or Canon). I have
actually run with both brands at times...Began Nikon, went both brands in 2003, ran Canon after 2003...and 2008 maybe
another year I run both again (the Nikon D3 is very impressive).

Ok, so there is a bit of a fork in the road at first. Maybe going to the local major camera store just to hold and
handle a few demo models will help sort that part out re which brand feels good to you. They both are good (Nikon or
Canon).

Now for bodies... You can get a lot of comparison and basic info from the website--> http://www.dpreview.com
Cost and budget are always hindering factors. But I try to go "used" a lot still (when another pro is selling or even
on eBay). Yes, one of my bodies at the moment is a Canon 5D. Colleague Dan Pickard has one too and I swear, his being
2007 issued, is getting better color etc then my 2006 issued Canon 5D. You lose some speed in frames per second (fps)
on the motordrive (5D is 3-fps). But in my technique tutorial, I talk some about shooting with lower speed motordrives and
thinking about just the peak moment, you intended more. Here are a couple of other things to think about. If you
shop "used" for the generation of camera bodies, say 2-3years back in production, you will get a good going
camera still. Just not the latest greatest in sensors (so less pixels). Tomek Radek from Poland did this, when he
bought his first good camera body. Most of us had Canon EOS 1D MarkII or MarkIIn bodies (8-fps). Tomek went for
the earlier EOS 1D and a 70-200mm/f2.8 zoom set-up. He saved thousands of dollars (or euros) and does ok with
it still, because he really wanted the 8-fps motordrive. Just his sensor is smaller and has less pixels in his images, to work
with.

You can even go with the Canon 400D (3-fps) or Canon 40D (40D is 5-6 fps). I don't know them so well, but still do
fine...just the frames per second (fps) on their motordrives will be slower and the sensor will not be full-frame like
the 5D body. So there is a bit of crop-in on the image or built-in magnification factor of usually 1.3x, 1.5x or 1.6x
on the sensor of those other bodies. I have become a big fan of going with 1:1 or full frame sensors. Meaning that say a
200mm lens stays a 200mm lens and the body's sensor doesn't produce like a 280mm image (with slight crop-in).
The camera reviews at www.dpreview.com will help to see those specs listed on each camera body.

Nikon starter bodies? Oh, I have to look, because I don't know Nikon so well since 2003. If you went for say a Nikon
D80 or D300...the discussion would be same same as above with the Canon 400D or 40D. A lot of folks will be
unloading on Nikon D2 pro bodies just now...because the "go to" flagship D3 body is shipping now and all the
Nikon sportsshooters want them. I think about a D3 myself even (if I can save the pennies).

So there are some choices on camera bodies. Again look around for "used". There in NZL or AUS there is craigslist
and there might be some of your mates unloading good gear there, where you live-->
http://auckland.craigslist.org/
http://sydney.craigslist.com.au/
Also eBay...
http://www.ebay.com.au/
http://pages.ebay.com/nz/

Lenses...
Yes, 70-200mm zoom is in everyone's camera bag. Couple of things to think about... At times to save pennies, I
have gone for 2nd maker glass, once or twice. These are smaller companies that make lenses to fit the common
Nikon, Canon, Minolta etc lens mounts...ie. Sigma, Tokina, Tamron. Their glass is well ok and just they are not so
expensive. I wouldn't go for anything that is f/stop 3.5 or higher. You want always f/2.8 for sport (or lower).
Also since the sport halls are smaller at the local level. Just a straight new or "used" 135mm/f2.8 lens will not be so
expensive and same same with 100mm/2.8. Finding a 70-200mm/f2.8 zoom "used" is going to be a challenge...those
stay in guy's camera bags a long time and few are around used. Except when a photog will switch completely to another
brand and sell all his glass.

One more thing... On like 85mm and 24-70mm range of lenses (fixed focal length or zooms). You won't use them
so much for sports action. Except when you have really close access in the smallest halls (remember central
subject image size is very important). But for theme images and winner's podium images, you may need them from
time to time. For pure action...the range is mostly 100mm -> 300mm in a small sporthall. You may want to stay
under 200mm anyhow, most of the time. Working too tight and cutting off arms and legs too much in framing, well it's a
real challenge. There is a whole art to working tight...when you see you are going to cut-off a lot in your
viewfinder framing and not showing full central subjects.

Now here is an interesting new development. If you read a certain colleague's page (Dave Black)...
http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop/index.htm
He talks about the newest bodies (in this case the Nikon D3) having new unreal ability at high ASA speeds. Dave
writes that at 3200ASA and 6400ASA, the results are quite pleasing. That one development kind of changes
everything I said above about going for f2.8. It means you can work at f/3.5 and higher and come away with nice results. I
was kind of amazed to read Dave working more at f/4.0, f/5.6, f/6.3, f/7.1 now...with the intent to increase his depth
of field. He could go wider f/stops. But with these newer sensors, he is choosing to work at higher, narrower f/stops,
just because it's possible and he wants the depth of field. Plus still comes out ok in low-light! So that could save
you a lot of expense in the long run on lenses...like with a newer say, a Nikon D300 body.

One speculation lately is that Canon will answer soon with a next generation of the Canon 5D body (5D MarkII or
7D are possible names, I have been reading). Even at 3-fps, I still liked my 5D a lot and Dan (Pickard) is getting
even better results with his 2007 version. If you get very serious about sports...eventually you will want an 8-fps or
now they are going up to 9 and 10-fps motordrives. The speed gives you more images to choose from (and more post-production
work, agh!). But I tell you a little secret...I turn back my fps speed many times on my fastest body (Canon 1D MarkIIn) to
the low speed setting, just so I can think more about the gymnast's peak moments and have less work to wade through later.

Last bit of advice... See if you can find a local community college or evening school class in basic photography
(sometimes camera stores have them too). Little story, a colleague (does boxing) used to meet a bartender at the airport
everytime he flew out...and just by talking to him about what he does (agh, boxing! sigh!). He got Rob
interested in photo in general. So Rob starts out by going to the local junior college in the evenings and learns the
basics. Ends up moving to Texas and getting a job at a small suburban newspaper in the Dallas area...and slowly
now works his way up to the bigger market parent newspaper there. Kind of amazing, he was just a bartender and
got into pro photography in his spare time.

Ah, I should save this little message and make it as an appendix to my tutorial page! jeje :)
Good Luck Jessica! Byeee, Tom