View Full Version : Sons sports
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 02:03
My wife just bought me a canon xti 400d with a Canon EF -S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 USM and a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS.
I was wondering if I am going to need any thing else to take pictures of
my sons football and basketball games.
I tried the camera for the first time at my nieces volleyball game the other day and the pictures were bad.
I am very new.
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 02:14
For indoor sports you are going to need faster glass, meaning the F stop will need to be below f2.8. Try the 85 f1.8. this is IMO the best fast lens that canon makes at a reasonable price. For football you may be able to get away with your 70-300 in the day time. you will need the reach of the zoom to get tight shots. For night games you will need something like the 70-200 f2.8 at a minimum,
Lot's of good advice on this forum, do a search and you will find some good threads on this subject.
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 07:09
Welcome to POTN ;) ! First, the good news: The XTi will be an excellent camera to start out with. Now the not-so-good news: your lenses are gonna limit you. Don't be discouraged, though, as this is almost always the case in photography. Like psurrette said, you might be able to get away with your 70-300 for day football, but at night, it will be way too "slow" (the aperture won't be large enough). The same will be true for any indoor sport like basketball.
The thing about shooting sports is you are almost always looking for more light. This is one of the primary reasons why you see those big honkin' white lenses (see my avatar) on the sidelines of football games and in the photo wells at baseball games (the other being the smaller depth of field you get from large aperture lenses, which results in fabulous subject isolation). The lenses themselves aren't that much "longer" than your 70-300, but their ability to gather light is MUCH better, and that is why they are bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive.
The suggested 85 f/1.8 ($350 new) and, if you can afford it, a 135 f/2.0 (approx $1,000 new) are excellent basketball lenses for the near court. The 70-200 f/2.8 is also a good basketball lens, but the light needs to be pretty decent in order to allow you to use it (this is the lens I use at the college and pro level, but lighting there is pretty good)
As for football, the 70-200 f/2.8 (Sigma version around $750 new) will perform well for action close to you, but it will be a little short for action much farther away than 20 yards. For more reach than this, you'll need something like a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 ($1,800 used).
If I were to suggest a single lens for both sports, it would be a 70-200 f/2.8, and hope the lighting in the gym for basketball was good enough to let you keep your shutter speeds > 1/250s .
BTW, volleyball is a tough sport to shoot, even for experienced photographers, so don't feel bad.
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 08:26
I started with the Rebel XT and the 70-300 (non IS) lens. Learning how to shoot outdoor sports with your setup is a challenge but not impossible. Keep asking questions and post some pictures!
The advice above is perfect!
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 11:03
Thank you for the advice
I did list the wrong lens I have the ef70-300mm f4-5.6 is usm.
It cost 699 sould i bring it back and get something else?
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 11:12
if it were me, i would... then i would try try to get a 70-200 2.8 --
but it may cost a little more money- but it would be worth it. imo
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 11:48
I agree that getting one of the 70-200 L's would be best. There are 4 different variations.
70-200mm f/4 $600
70-200mm f/4 IS $1050
70-200mm f/2.8 $1100
70-200mm f/42.8 IS $1650
For sports the IS in not critical but nice to have. The 2.8 versions are the ones that would be able to work indoors. Even if you only have a budget of $600 the 70-200mm f/4 will be a much better lens than the 70-300 IMO
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 16:59
Exactly as he said above!!!!!!!
If your not sure about which lens you want to buy....rent it from a local pro camera shop. I rented a 70-200mm f 2.8 USM IS L lens for $35 for a weekend here in San Francisco. I love that lens. It made me feel alot better about my decision to buy one, since I was able to try it and others out before I decided on which one to buy.
22nd of September 2007 (Sat), 20:21
Don't forget the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. It's an excellent lens, and can be had new for around $750 if I'm not mistaken.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.