Volleyball Pics

[jengel]

I'm fairly new to digital photography and SLR's, so I apologize if these questions are stupid.

I have a 70 - 200mm 2.8 lens that works great for hockey and longer distance volleyball pics (from up in the stands) without flash, but I am looking for something that will help with close up shots from right next to the court. My standard 18 - 55 is too slow or I struggle with getting properly exposed and clear action shots. I really want to get a lens that will do the trick, but not completely overspend.

Can anyone offer me some advice? I know that with some work, I can probably get some decent photos with the stock lens, but if I want to invest in a better lens so I don't struggle with so many missed shots, what are my options? Should I be looking at something like a 18 - 50mm, 24 - 70mm or something fixed? What about these 50mm 1.8 lenses I see for $80. Someone suggested I look at these. I really have no idea what I should be looking for. I don't want to spend more than $500, with something in the $300 or below range being ideal. I have looked at a wide range of used lenses on Ebay and Craig's list, but really don't know what I should be looking for. I can get a Sigma 2.8 in the 24 or 28 - 70mm for around $250 - $300 and have been looking at Canon. I even was chasing a 24 - 70 2.8 L Canon, but these are a little more than I can afford to spend.

Thanks,

Jaime

[superdiver]

The 85 1.8 is probably the best for this situation and its less the $500, or the 50 1.4 might work as well, I find it focuses to slow on occasion for me, but it works fine....

[shaunknee]

I've shot several university games and I personally find that 2.8 is slowest lens I can use at ISO 1600. I've seen lots of 135L at the games, probably because they are a little faster. I have got some great results from my 35mm as well - not from the stands however.

The 85mm is a good suggestion.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=272315

[liza]

I use the 100 f/2 and the 85mm f/1.8 for volleyball, as I prefer to use fast primes in high school gyms with low light. The 100mm lens is the one I tend to use most often, although the 135L might be another consideration.

[gymdad]

Jaime,

I'll add a vote for the 85mm/1.8. It focuses very quickly, and my copy is pretty sharp even wide open at 1.8. I know a lot of shooters use it for basketball....not sure if volleyball shooters use it or not, but maybe some of them will chime in. (The 85/1.8 is in the $325-ish range brand new).

[superdiver]

Liza, do you use the 100 as much as you use the 85?

[liza]

Liza, do you use the 100 as much as you use the 85?

Probably more. It's just about the right amount of reach for volleyball. I've also been using it a lot more for basketball, too.

[Lacks_focus]

The 85 1.8 is sweet.

Keep in mind, you can also rent lenses. There are several sites you can do that from. I've been thinking about getting the 135 2.0, but I don't know how much I'd use it over the 70-200 2.8, 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 I already have. I am waiting for my rental to arrive. I'll be shooting youth hockey and girls gymnastics this weekend. I'd say that should give me an idea on whether I want to start saving for one. Just a suggestion, but you don't have to drop a ton of cash on something you may use every once in a while. The place I rented from is www.lensprotogo.com (http://www.lensprotogo.com/) The 135 2.0 was $56.00 for one week, with insurance, and two way shipping included. Not too bad. I went with this company because they had what I wanted in stock (sometimes a problem for high demand stuff), and they use Pelican cases to protect the lens during shipping.

[vetkrazy]

85mm f/1.8

I use it about 90% of the time, 135L f/2 and 70-200 the rest of the time.

[grego]

70-200 will do fine with on the court photos in volleyball, at least focal length wise. I mean its shorter than the 85 1.8, so it would be illogical that it wouldn't work in terms of focal length.

Watch out with eBay though. You really have to do research there to get your deal and make sure its safe. Same goes with craigslist(always do local buys/meeting up with the person).

Depends what level of sport you shoot(as you get higher up, light in gyms tends to get better), but 2.8 will probably be slow for you.

85 1.8, 100 2, and 135 2L would be your best bets probably. 85 being priced lowest and 135 being highest of those 3.

[AB8ND]

Back when I shot Volleyball for a local paper I shot either an 85 f/1.8 or a 200 f2.8 , each on a seperate body.

Jack

[liza]

The 200 f/2.8 is sweet for "sportraits." I use mine from time to time to get portraits of the senior players.

[jengel]

I'm sorry, but if I already have a 70 - 200mm 2.8, why would I buy an 85mm lens? I am new to this, but don't I already have a pretty good lens for anything between 70 and 200? The problem I have is that when I am in close (right next to the net), I need a wider angle lens. Wouldn't a 24 - 70 or 18 - 50mm make more sense.

[vetkrazy]

Unless you shoot in a Div 1 gym or use strobes, there is a big difference between f/2.8 and f/1.8. You might want to read Bryan Petersons book "Understanding Exposure". It will explain the coralation between shutter speed, aperature, iso and white balance. If your gym is bright enough to use the 70-200 and get sharp, relativly noise free shots that is great. What are your settings in your gym? That would help with recomendations.
As a reference for you I shoot a MKIIN, 85mm: ss 1/500, iso 1600, f/2. With the 70-200: iso 3200, ss 1/400, f/2.8. All shooting is done in Raw with a cwb of 4100 Kelvin.

[liza]

I'm sorry, but if I already have a 70 - 200mm 2.8, why would I buy an 85mm lens? I am new to this, but don't I already have a pretty good lens for anything between 70 and 200? The problem I have is that when I am in close (right next to the net), I need a wider angle lens. Wouldn't a 24 - 70 or 18 - 50mm make more sense.

More responsive autofocus in low light conditions. And the 85 is plenty wide for sideline volleyball shooting. You don't want to shoot sports too wide.

[shaunknee]

I'm sorry, but if I already have a 70 - 200mm 2.8, why would I buy an 85mm lens? I am new to this, but don't I already have a pretty good lens for anything between 70 and 200? The problem I have is that when I am in close (right next to the net), I need a wider angle lens. Wouldn't a 24 - 70 or 18 - 50mm make more sense.

With prime lenses you get speed (low apparatuses number) and this gives you faster shutter speeds when you are not allowed to use a flash.

[Kenya]

I shot several volleyball matches with a 50mm f/1.8 and a Canon 350D. Shortly after the season ended, I got a 28mm f/1.8 and a 85mm f/1.8. Given the choice during the season, I would have preferred using the 85mm f/1.8.

Regarding your questions, the big difference is light. In shooting indoors volleyball and basketball, I've noticed cameramen come in with f/4.0 and even f/2.8 lenses and leave with dark (underexposed) images. The 85mm f/1.8 will let in more light that permits you to have a faster shutter speed (to freeze action) without having to use a flash.

I can understand wanting a wider angle lens. Sometimes, it can make the scene more dramatic. (I've experimented with the 28mm under the goal at basketball games.) However, most of my best shots were with the longer lenses. In most cases, you should be able to backup a step or two and get the shot a bit wider without ever having to change a lens. If you really don't want to use the 85mm f/1.8, try the 50mm f/1.8. However, for anything other than sideline use, I believe it may be too short.

[superdiver]

the problem with the 70-200 is NOT the 70-200 part. the problem is that in most gyms that I frequent the 2.8 is not fast enough...

[disneydork06]

idk, the 24-70 seems a bit close for vball. You are then concentrated more on on side/spot on the court. depending on the team you could be getting a lot of the peoples back when they are attacking. I like the distance you can get with the 70-200. if ur able I would say to try and move around the court some than just from the stands. the 85 is a really fast lens and its distance is really good around the net at games. well I guess you could go for digs and such with the 24-70.

[grego]

idk, the 24-70 seems a bit close for vball.
You answered your own uncertainess. That's exactly where something shorter can come in useful, especially if you can get pretty close to the court.
well I guess you could go for digs and such with the 24-70.

[AnzioBake]

When asking which lens, you also need to consider where you are going to be and what you want to capture as well as the amount of light availble? Closer to the court sideline, a wider lens, at the back a longer lense. With quickly changing situations as in VBall and BBall faster lenses are always better. With primes, are you able to move enough to get the required crop.
I photographed both the males and females beach FIVB event and walked around with a 24-70 on one camera and a 70-200 on another. From the same position I swapped cameras i.e. lenses depending on what I wanted to capture. From the sideline, longer lense to capture the players concetration and focus, shorter for full body action. From closer to the baseline, longer lense for tightly cropped image, wider lense for accrobatic dives and team action.

You may want to try pre-focusing to eliminate the focusing speed issue ( with obvious considerations for the area in which the subject is going to be and required DOP). If you're behind the baseline the net is relatively at the same distance.

Consider your options relative to what you want to capture and understand each options limitations.

[jharms1]

I started out shooting volleyball with the 70 - 200mm 2.8. I later bought the 85mm 1.8. It has been hard for me to give up the flexibility of the zoom. I use the 85mm in the darker gyms that my daughter plays in, but when the light permits I seem to always go back to the 70 - 200mm.

The key to less noisy pictures is to get the exposure right. Many times I've shot with too high of a shutter speed for the available light. When adding brightness in the RAW processing the pics get very noisy.

I guess it's personal preference but I like tighter shots for volleyball. In my opinion, the 70 side of the 70 - 200 is not too high but sometime I would like the 200 side to be higher. And yes, I do have court side access.