PDA

View Full Version : high school sports lens


dilley5
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:21
Hello everyone. I will be shooting football,soccer and probably some volleyball for the local newspaper. I shoot with a 20d and 580ex. My 70-200f4 is going to be too slowand my tamron 17 -50 2.8 is too short. SOOOOOOO. I will need a new lens. I am debating about these lenses. 70-200 2.8 or 200 2.8L. also I am fuzzy on IS as it pertains to moving subjects. I have read on here that it is no help ,but I thought I had also seen some sports shots on here using IS. I could be out of my mind though. if IS would be a consideration,would the 300 f4 IS be anygood for this application. Or am I worrying too much since it is just a newspaper and the IQ doesn't need to be that great. I would like to stay under $1200 bucks. If you are bored and want to answer yet another "which lens" question, I will be honored. mark:D

S.Horton
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:26
Football/soccer at the price you mention, the 300 f/4 L IS is correct.

IS mode 2 helps you when you pan.

Indoor volleyball, 85 f/1.8; you could barely shoot it at f/2.8.

LightRules
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:28
Check out the excellent Sigma 100-300 f4 EX

dilley5
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:38
Thanks I had played around with the 300 in the store. It was nice. seems sensless to buy another 70-200 anyway. thanks again

dilley5
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:42
Iwill also check out the sigma. maybe at 3200 iso. would you suggest using a monopod also

CountryBoy
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:47
Yes a monopd with The Sigma. I use the sigma for day sports. For football at night, I don't know. It would depend on the lighting. On some fields the lighting is so bad a 2.8 lens wouldn't be fast enough.

RyanD
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:51
if you want to use a monopod you'll want to get yourself a Really Right Stuff bracket so you can shoot in portrait...as most sport shots are better off in that orientation. I thought about getting a monopod for basketball but I think it would be too cumbersome and actually make it harder to get the shots that I want...

EDIT** thats if you were planning on getting a prime lens (which I would highly recommend if you ever plan on shooting inside a highschool gym)

liza
24th of August 2007 (Fri), 23:52
I use a Sigma 70-200 and a 200L with a teleconverter for field sports, and the 85mm and 100 mm primes for gym sports.

pagnamenta
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 00:23
The 70-200 f2.8 is my main sports lens for football, soccer, and everything else high school sports related. Sometimes it's nice to get the 300 mm range, but the f2.8 is almost necessary (though you could make it with f4) For volleyball, you're gonna need f2.8 or faster.

Yohan Pamudji
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 01:02
I hate flash sports shots, but I think local newspapers prefer it. You might want to check with them to see how their sports photos have looked in the past. If you do the flash thing, you might be able to get away with setting your camera on M exposure mode, say at f/4 1/400 ISO 3200 (your actual settings will differ), and use flash. But if you go flashless for nighttime football you're almost guaranteed to need f/2.8. No need for IS with sports photos, as your shutter speeds will be high enough to handhold the lens easily, although using a monopod helps stabilize and reduce shooting fatigue too.

Volleyball? Look into the 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2 if you shoot available light, although if you're in a nice gym you might get away with the 70-200 f/2.8 there too. See if you can scout out the field and gym to see what kind of light you're dealing with before making your final purchase decision.

naqs
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 01:07
Check out the excellent Sigma 100-300 f4 EX

I think this would be a good choice... from my experience the 70-200 is just not long enough

HuskiesD1
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 02:53
Kinda curious...

High school sports lighting is generally crap.

Why are you recommending the use of an f/4 lens? I personally use a 70-200 2.8L and can sometimes get 1/400 @ 1600.

What shutter speed do you use?

EDIT: I say this because I am looking for a longer field sports lens myself, preferably without spending 2,000+ on at least a Sigma 120-300 2.8.

cdifoto
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 03:05
Some pretty bad advice here.

If your 70-200 f/4 is too slow, a 300 f/4 or 100-300 f/4 won't suffice either. You'll need a prime. If you can get right on the sidelines, the 135mm f/2L or 85mm f/1.8 might do the trick. Or else the 200mm f/2.8. If f/2.8 will be good enough, you could sell your 70-200 f/4 to help fund a 70-200 f/2.8 and still have enough cash left for the 85mm f/1.8 which you will very likely need for volleyball and basketball and such.

As for IS...it doesn't hurt you much, but it really doesn't help either, unless you're panning. It stabilizes YOU but it doesn't stop subject movement.

BaumannPhotography
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 03:08
I just got in from shooting the opening football games tonight in our area. And I am shooting a volleyball tournament tomorrow (I mean today :)) Lenses I use:

Football/Track/Baseball - 70-200 2.8 w/IS (which doesn't help), and 300 2.8 and 1.4x extender
Volleyball/basketball - 85 1.8 and 70-200 if the lighting is good

kidpower
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 03:56
If you are going to be shooting for the local paper chances are you are going to encounter a wide variety of venues. I'm assuming many of the football/soccer games may run into the evening or even start at night.

I think you are going to want a 2.8 lens at minimum. Your placement at these events will also help dictate your choice.

Indoors I'd at least have a 85 1.8 in my aresenal, even if you decide to go with a 2.8. I suppose if you are going to use flash that could change things.

Personally, last season I used a 135L and 85 1.8 on an XT exclusively for the entire football and basketball and volleyball season. Short on the outdoor sports to cover all the action, but perfect when the action was in my zone.

Good luck.

P.S. - All of the above assumes the typical high school lighting - mediocre to bad at best. If you are in an area that has pretty good lighting that could change things.

naqs
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 06:22
Kinda curious...

High school sports lighting is generally crap.

Why are you recommending the use of an f/4 lens? I personally use a 70-200 2.8L and can sometimes get 1/400 @ 1600.

What shutter speed do you use?


Thats true... but for football and soccer 200mm is not good enough

S.Horton
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 09:02
Kinda curious...

High school sports lighting is generally crap.

Why are you recommending the use of an f/4 lens? I personally use a 70-200 2.8L and can sometimes get 1/400 @ 1600.

What shutter speed do you use?

EDIT: I say this because I am looking for a longer field sports lens myself, preferably without spending 2,000+ on at least a Sigma 120-300 2.8.

You're right -- But, outdoors, in his range of price, f/4 is all he's going to find in a prime for max IQ. Indoors, recc. 85 f/1.8 for v-ball.

At night, H.S. outdoors, f/2.8 is jacks to open.

Zilly
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 12:50
You're right -- But, outdoors, in his range of price, f/4 is all he's going to find in a prime for max IQ. Indoors, recc. 85 f/1.8 for v-ball.

At night, H.S. outdoors, f/2.8 is jacks to open.

you can have all the iq you want but if you carnt get a fast enough shutter IQ means FA

High school sports you need f2.8

also depending on the league flash might be a big no no

pagnamenta
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 13:24
I wouldn't count on flash, schools in my area hate it.

With your budget, you might want to look into a prime for indoor sports shots. I'm not sure on performance, but the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and 85 f1.8 should fit your budget and cover your needs well.

NorCalAl
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 13:26
I shot nighttime HS football for two years. I used a 70-200/2.8 and even then had some real issues getting good shots. IS certainly won't help, unless you're shooting before the snap. :D And folks are right, 200 sometimes isn't enough. Even from the sidelines. In my case, I simply choose to not shoot the far end of the action. Sure, I missed shots, but I didn't have thousands of dollars to spend on a lens - and a second body - to bring the action closer. I was using an XT at the time and a Tokina 70-200, which has awful CA - and trust me, bright uniforms and crappy lighting will bring out the CA like you've never seen.
I'd personally use a Canon 70-200/2.8, a flash (if allowed, my league did and once I found that out, I really got some much better shots, though synch speeds limit freezing action) and good luck. Get a sideline pass, shoot the action that's close and don't worry about the stuff you can't get. I can only comment on football as I didn't do any other sports.
Good luck!

stickx
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 16:49
I've been trying to shoot volleyball since last spring and I have had to shoot at 1/640, 3200 with my 85/1.8 to adequately stop the action. I did use a 70-200/2.8 in McCormick Place in Chicago, but it has better lighting than most high schools. Still thinking about the 135/2.0.

kidpower
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 19:20
"NorCalAl - shoot the action that's close and don't worry about the stuff you can't get"

I realize that everybody shoots for a different reason and we all have our own style (and sometimes your job dictates that you get it all), but that is about the best general advice I could offer to someone shooting sports. Will you miss some great action shots. Sure. But usually there will more than enough to go around.

Generally in all high school sports you can get relatively close, even as a spectator.

mebailey
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 20:26
I might pick up the 135L for the volleyball and use your 70-200 +/- flash for football and soccer. A TC could give extra reach for outdoor day games...

dilley5
25th of August 2007 (Sat), 23:26
thanks for all the suggestions and personal experiences. haven't made up my mind yet but I have more knowledge thanks to you people . thanks again

metalman1010
30th of August 2007 (Thu), 17:35
Thats true... but for football and soccer 200mm is not good enough

Unless it's the 200mm 1.8 and the 1.4 teleconverter. When put together that becomes 280mm f/2.5 which is a very nice combo and the AF speed really doesn't diminish that much.

I use that combo very nicely for Lacrosse and thats on a field just a bit smaller than Soccer.

Ross