Action Sports Photographers...Which lens should I buy?

[Skalin]

Well seeing as how I am going to be buying a used 20D from KEH with in the week. I still have 465 to spend on a lens. I will be shooting rollerblading photography mostly along with walk around and small venue concert photography as well. For shooting rollerblading (same general concept as skateboarding or Biking pretty much) I will be mostly shooting indoors at skateparks seeing as it's winter and most of the skating outdoors right now will be minimal.

I was thinking of buying either the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye, the canon 70-200mm f4, Tokina 12-24mm uwa, or the sigma 12-24mm uwa. Other suggestions are open as well. I think if I go for something that is 10mm I'd rather go with the fisheye than the sigma/canon 10-20mm. I'll put a poll so you can vote

[ak_powder_monkey]

in action sports swa lenses are pretty much useless, unless you are shooting rails/stairs which gets boring.

[dmwierz]

Monkey's got it right. I rarely, and I mean rarely, use my EF-S 17-55 f/2.8IS for any action - maybe for jube shots or post game or even an "environmental" shot - maybe.

Plus, when you ask a question like this, you need to specify: which sports; which levels; what type of venues; day/night; what type of access will you have; indoor or outdoor; how much do you want to pay; etc??

I would normally recommend the 70-200 f/2.8L since this is a great lens for almost any sport (at least it can be made to work for any sport if you choose your situation well) but it's even hard to do this without knowing more about what you are trying to do.

This is like going to an automobile web site and asking "What car should I buy?" without saying anything about what you need a car for.

Here's a ton of info - read these:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=445955

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61801

[jcpoulin]

I agree with the above, have never used these in covering sports unless you are looking for side-line special shots. If you want wide, you may consider a faster prime.( or just get the 16-35L, which mine has never seen a sporting event!!)

[BLS439]

What?! I very much disagree with the above.

First, what lens - if any - do you already have?

You have listed three lenses that are similar the UWA's and one zoom telephoto. If you have no lenses, I would start with the 70-200. If you already have that focal range covered check an UWA.

Lots of sports photographers use UWA's to create scenic action sports shots. The WA give you the ability to be in close but have much of the background in play in the image, where the 70-200 may not.

Of all my glass I use my 70-200, 16-35, and 10-17 the most. The 50, 300, and anything else stays in the bag lonely.

[dmwierz]

Dave,

Lots of sports photographers use UWA's to create scenic action sports shots

But of the shots that are considered to be "true" action images, what percentage are taken with UWA lenses? Relatively small, I'd reckon. Sure, there are the environmental shots showing the players with the crowd in the background, but I have never once heard a Photo Editor admonish me to "shoot wider" - quite the opposite - normally it's been to shoot and/or crop tighter.

I guess it all depends on style (yours or the person/company for whom you are shooting).

Again, without knowing more about the OP's needs and drivers, recommending anything specific wouldn't be prudent.

[Skalin]

I will be shooting action sports such as rollerblading and skateboarding. Since it is winter I will more than likely be inside most of the time at indoor skateparks. I may be wrong but in a crowded small skatepark I think that the 70-200mm would be too long and I would be using it up to 100mm at most. If I were shooting in spring or summer and outdoors more then I would look more into the 70-200. I still would like to get it but I would like something that could be of use right now.

[primoz]

I actually shoot quite a bit with wide angle. Of course majority is still shoot with long lenses, but I would say at least 10-15% I try to shoot wide. It's not all that much, but still lot more then nothing ;)
As far as selection goes... just one tip, because I have no experiences with other listed lenses then Canon 17-40/4. Go with lens which has fix aperture through all length of zoom. When shooting in manual, it's really annoying if all of a sudden lens is not f4.0 anymore but f5.6 ;)

[jcpoulin]

I will revise my thoughts....when you said action sports, I envisioned basketball, hockey, skiing...all stuff were access is farther away. If you are doing skatepark stuff, with people coming over you and low ground shots....then a wide would be needed. I would go with the 16-35 or 17-55 IS then....fixed focal length and built like a tank (the 16-35).

[TopGear1Ds]

I would go with the 16-35 or 17-55 IS then....fixed focal length and built like a tank (the 16-35).
Don't forget the OP's budget.. ~$450

And to the OP, I think none of the lenses you chose would work well for your description. You want to shoot indoors, but you've only listed f/4 or slower lenses. With most indoor sports lighting you'll be wishing you had a fast (f/2 or faster) prime. Maybe f/2.8 if you shoot iso3200 (never on my mind since my xt can't).

[Skalin]

Don't forget the OP's budget.. ~$450

And to the OP, I think none of the lenses you chose would work well for your description. You want to shoot indoors, but you've only listed f/4 or slower lenses. With most indoor sports lighting you'll be wishing you had a fast (f/2 or faster) prime. Maybe f/2.8 if you shoot iso3200 (never on my mind since my xt can't).

Also, for indoors I will be using off camera flashes, two vivi 285hv's to be exact, so wider aperture isn't really an issue.

[SuzyView]

For sports indoors, go with the 85 1.8.

[Skalin]

Also, for indoors I will be using off camera flashes, two vivi 285hv's to be exact, so wider aperture isn't really an issue.
...

[Dennis_Hammer]

Inside, 70-200 2.8L IS or else be prepared to frustrated on a regular basis

[dirt lover]

I use my Ultra Wide Angle alot shooting sports like biking and snowboarding.

http://photos.mediabypb.com/photos/223912543-M.jpg

Though, for sports like football and soccer, it probably wouldn't be used much.

[nckabill]

I respectfully disagree with all the above statements about longer lenses. I have shot skateboarding for about 10 years. Wide is where it is at 95% of the time. In your budget I would suggest the 10-20 Sigma.

[Skalin]

I will kindly state again that I don't need extreme wide apertures such as 2.8 or 1.8 seeing as how I will be using strobes/flashes when shooting.

[mikeassk]

I would get the 70-200 for sure. you will eventually want to get a wide, but id rather be stuck with just the L if it was my only lens.

Wides are cool for anything
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/mikeassk/nonpi.jpg

[pjtemplin]

I will kindly state again that I don't need extreme wide apertures such as 2.8 or 1.8 seeing as how I will be using strobes/flashes when shooting.

And I will kindly remind you of the laws of physics and optics: your flash effectiveness is directly influenced by your aperture and your flash-subject distance. On the 285HV units, setting the unit for super-wide (i.e. 28mm coverage) gives a guide number of 70 at ASA100. At f/4 and ASA 800, you're talking a maximum flash-subject distance of 49ft, but you can't be any more than 21 feet away from the subject if you're shooting at 12mm or you'll have flash vignetting. From what I'm reading though, you'll want 1/16th power for recharge times of ~1 second. That'll drop you to a flash distance of 4.4 feet and a camera-subject distance of 1.9 feet. Are you really so sure those flashes are going to save the day at f/4? Or can you really wait ~7 seconds for your flashes to recharge at full power?