would you rather buy...

[bwana]

You're missing my point. They've been photographing sports for a long, long time, often using nothing more than ASA400 film, and they've managed. What has changed that you now need such a high ISO to do the same thing now? I get your point that you CAN do things differently now, but if the old way worked fine why does it need to change?

Funnily enough I found myself shooting a capping ceremony in a school chapel this morning at some ridiculously high ISOs and it struck me that there's no way I could have got those important - to the client at least - shots back in the day. It also made me start thinking about what other fantastic opportunities photographers must have been passed over because of technological limitations - whether it be film or digital.

 

[garyc]

Back in the day capping ceremonies looked like a nightclub with all the flashes going off. Same for lots of other indoor functions. It seems that one of the advantages of modern kit is that it allows the photographer to be a lot less intrusive.

 

[kolaval]

I'm a nikon user myself (D90 and now D7100), though second hand canon lenses are more abundant.
I would not worry too much about the body.

You're going to get curious, and want more range and faster glass sooner or later, and then the headache starts.
Imho if you take crappy pics with your kit 18-55mm lens, buying a 18-55mm F/2.8 will not help you and only if the lens become a real limitation should you look for something better.
Even then the internet is awash with pro and anti comments/article/review on every lens and body you can think of.
So if you can rent/borrow a lens to try before you buy even better.

On my D90 I really only had my 18-105mm kit lens and a very old 105mm macro with lots of mold.
They have and still keep me busy for hours sometimes.

Point is:
Gear does not = great shots, it just creates more opportunity for great shots.