Mike Johnston (The Online Photographer) recently wrote about strategies for buying new cameras—which is certainly not a new topic. If we consider cameras (and lenses) as tools for doing a job, then I think it comes down to a straightforward cost-benefit analysis: what benefits do you expect to reap by going with a particular choice of equipment, and what costs will need to be paid? Choose the option that best meets your requirements at the lowest cost, and you have your answer.
Photographic equipment tends to offer a limited feature set (though the manufacturers will, of course, try to differentiate their products by offering more features than their competitors) … when it comes to the bottom line, camera design hasn’t dramatically changed for many years, in my view. There are aspects of cameras that could be better or worse, going from model to model (e.g., usable ISO range, frames per second), but it basically comes down to how quickly and accurately a camera can autofocus (which will also depend a lot on the lens), the image quality that the camera can provide (including usable ISO range and dynamic range at a given ISO setting), and how quickly the camera can do it all again (i.e., frame rate). From that perspective, I think the strategy that makes most sense is to buy a tried-and-tested model near the end of its product cycle (i.e., just before the manufacturer stops making it), so that you are still buying a new product (with full warranty) and are well aware of its strengths and weaknesses (thanks to the many reviews that will have been published on the Internet—but hopefully also through your own handling of the camera).
In many ways, I see parallels with computer operating systems. Buying or upgrading to the latest version of your preferred operating system will certainly see you gain the benefits of the newest software tools available, but possibly at the cost of bugs or other problems (e.g., needing to change your workflow due to a change in the way the operating system itself works, or needing to upgrade to new versions of your application software). While photography is a hobby for me, I approach it with the same degree of seriousness as I do my work, so my equipment consists of ‘tools’ rather than ‘toys’—in the sense that utility is foremost, while novelty (in this context) is very low in importance.
For anyone who might be looking to get into low-light action photography (or serious photography) for the first time, my general recommendations from eight years ago still hold true—an entry-level DSLR body and a 50 mm prime lens should be more than enough to get you started. I would suggest going either with Canon or Nikon.
If choosing Canon, consider the Canon EOS 1200D with a Canon EF 50 mm f/1.8 STM lens. It will typically come with a ‘kit lens’ such as an 18–55 mm f/3.5–5.6 lens, and possibly also a short telephoto zoom lens. These kit lenses generally represent decent value-for-money if bought at the same time as the body.
If choosing Nikon, consider the Nikon D3300 with a Nikkor AF-S 50 mm f/1.8 lens. As above, kit lenses usually represent good value-for-money these days, but check on-line reviews if you’d like to have some assurance about what you’re considering buying.
Bear in mind that, if you’re looking at the Nikon D3300, you’ll want to be sure to avoid the older Nikkor AF 50 mm f/1.8 lens, which does not have a built-in autofocus motor. You’ll need the newer AF-S version if you want the lens to autofocus with that body.
If you’re looking at higher-end equipment, take a look at my comparisons from June 2015, which I’d consider still reasonably up to date. The big change that’s happened is that the Nikon D500 is due to be released soon, so if you’re considering the D7200, D610, or D750, you might like to bear that in mind—I expect that the D500 will be much better suited for low-light action shooting than any of those three older models.