Best lens for racing?

[superstar]

Hello everyone,

I recently purchared a Digital Rebel so I can take it to the Formula 1 race. I only have the 18-55mm lens kit it came with. I want to purchase a zoom-telephoto, but need your advice. Here are my criteria:

1) I am not a millionare.

2) I am a novice photographer.

3) I still like the best picture quality I can get.

I can get fairly close to the action in the race, but I do not have a photographers pass to get really close. All shots I want will be mainly of cars in action (40mph around turns to 200+mph)

Any recommendations? I have looked at several but it can get confusing.

Thanks alot for the advice, Richard

[Adam Hicks]

Well your first issue will be using the DRebel for motorsports. The consecutive frame rate is slow and there's no AI Servo mode in anything but the preset Sports mode. You will probably be better off keeping it in that sports mode, even though it will result in your being locked down to ISO400. Luckily that camera does just fine at ISO400.

As far as your original question, I would first recommend looking around your area for camera shops that rent lenses. Call the biggest one around and they'll tell you where to rent. Rent a 70-200 2.8 or a 100-400L. That would be my first choice. I do it all the time with a 200 1.8, and will be doing so again this weekend for an indoor Supercross shoot. Doesn't make sense to buy a $5000 lens when I can rent it for the weekend at $35.

If you're set on buying a lens, and want one that you can use for a long time, go with the 70-200 f4L. It's $600, but it'll retain that value should you need to sell it, and it's performance is second to none.

Good luck!
Adam

[RockOne]

Best lens for racing?
A fast one :-} :-} :-}.

About what budget?. I use a EF 75-300 II. I havn't used it on cars though, but it seems to handle movement OK, but it is definitely not the bast lens in the lineup (and has been superceded by the 75-300 III), but it is reasonably cheap ! Hopefully by the end uof the year I'll have upgraded to either the Sigma 50-500 or Canon 100-400 - both of which should do a much better job (although they are pricey !).

[superstar]

Should I get one with the USM? Does that increase the focus time enough to justify the extra $$$?

Rich

[Adam Hicks]

Well and when you talk about fast, it depends on where you are. In Texas I shoot races at f8+ and still have to work to get below 1/1000 at ISO200. If you're in England (like a very skilled motorsports photographer on this board is) you have dreary cloudy days to deal with (I'd probably just shoot myself, but that's neither here nor there!) and need a brighter lens. He uses the Sigma 120-300 2.8 which is an excellent lens, but more pricey than the 100-400L.

So don't be afraid of a 70-300 f-whatever if you have decent light. Just get one that's rated well for image quality.

[Tom W]

Like Adam says, but also consider the 100-300 f/4-5.6 USM - it has very fast focusing capabilities.

[defordphoto]

Hello everyone,

I recently purchared a Digital Rebel so I can take it to the Formula 1 race. I only have the 18-55mm lens kit it came with. I want to purchase a zoom-telephoto, but need your advice. Here are my criteria:

1) I am not a millionare.

Neither is anyone else here. :)

Key is to a valid answer to your question is; What is your budget for this lens?

[superstar]

I would say my budget is around $500 USD, but I could go a little over it. The race I will be shooting is the USGP in Indianapolis, IN. It is usually sunny there.

Rich

[defordphoto]

At any F1 race you can only get so close. You'll never get media credentials because F1 has their assigned photogs. (PERIOD)

Anyway, you'd probably be better off getting the best XX-300 lens you can get and suffer with marginal photos, but in the long run I'll suggest the infamous Canon 70-200L f/4.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=183198&is=USA

Try to get a little closer... ;)

[skyphix]

I'd agree with above... maybe a 70-200 F4L with a 1.4x converter?

[free996]

A fast one :-} :-} :-}.

About what budget?. I use a EF 75-300 II. I havn't used it on cars though, but it seems to handle movement OK, but it is definitely not the bast lens in the lineup (and has been superceded by the 75-300 III), but it is reasonably cheap ! Hopefully by the end uof the year I'll have upgraded to either the Sigma 50-500 or Canon 100-400 - both of which should do a much better job (although they are pricey !).

Don't go with the 50-500 . Its OK at higher shutter speeds but I found the images were a little soft and needed a bit of work . I'm using sigmas 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4x converter , absolutly cracking lens .
www.studio21.co.uk most of the pics are done with this combination

[Cadwell]

You can get lovely motorsport shots from a 300D/dRebel. A friend of mine (who also posts on here occasionaly under the username "Brands") does these Brands Fotopic Gallery (http://brands85.fotopic.net/) and I promise he never uses "sports mode". They're all shot in TV. He uses a Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX which is a lovely lens but possibly a little over your budget.

I guess light won't be a problem at the US GP, but you will need something in the order of 300mm that focuses pretty quickly.

[the7ferret]

for $500 you can get the 70-200 f4 and it will be MUCH better than the 75-300

[Littlenose]

Richard,

I'm in the same predicament almost... i love taking the motorsport pics, from the wrong side of the fence.
This weekend gone, i spent down at Brands Hatch, with the 300D and the 75-300mm USM III lens... like Cadwell's friend, i don't use the "sports" mode, i stick to TV mode, and often presetting the focus where i know the action shot will be.

I will be looking for a longer lens once i've saved the funds to do so, but at the moment, i'm doing an apprentiship [sp?] on the 75-300, and i'm getting some results that i'm happy with - here's my Brands Hatch Gallery :-
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mikeyandjo/bsb_05/bsb.htm

Mikey