Motorsport photography

[Javelin]

Hey all, just joined Forum today. Figured those that do would be the best source of advice? So, I am wanting to buy a used Canon body and lenses with the primary use being Motorsports photography. Looking for suggestions! Thanx all.

[jock3]

You should certainly be able to get hold of either the 40d or 50d second hand without to many problems, either will do the job that you require.

[GVal]

as jock3 stated, 40D or 50D are solid action sports bodies. As for the lens, it really depends on what and where specifically you're shooting. Will you be close to the action or shooting from afar? What lighting conditions? And of course, what kind of budget are you trying to work with?

[Titus213]

Canon has a goodly supply of refurbed 40D, 50D, and even 7D bodies.

As to the lens - the fatest lens you can afford in the focal length you will need. I'd start with a 70-200/2.8 IS which is always nice to have.

[MT Stringer]

Canon has a goodly supply of refurbed 40D, 50D, and even 7D bodies.

As to the lens - the fatest lens you can afford in the focal length you will need. I'd start with a 70-200/2.8 IS which is always nice to have.

Yep, what he said.

NHRA Spring Nationals in Baytown, Tx. (http://mtstringer.smugmug.com/Motorsports/NHRA-Spring-Nationals-2010)
7D w/70-200 f/2.8L IS shot from the stands. Pits images were captured with either the 17-40 or the 24-70. I used both. Uh-huh, my bag was a little heavy! :)

[Titus213]

Yep, what he said.

NHRA Spring Nationals in Baytown, Tx. (http://mtstringer.smugmug.com/Motorsports/NHRA-Spring-Nationals-2010)
7D w/70-200 f/2.8L IS shot from the stands. Pits images were captured with either the 17-40 or the 24-70. I used both. Uh-huh, my bag was a little heavy! :)

NWLMRA - La Center, Washington (http://www.norwoodphotos.com/Events/La-Center-Festival/Our-Days-Celebration/13441848_HSxux#978358531_2tHcn)

Not sure it was a sanctioned event. All taken with the Canon 70-200/2.8 IS from about anywhere I wanted to go.:lol:

[andrewc]

Depends on the nature of motorsport and how serious you want to be. Acceptable results can be had with a low grade body and a 55-250IS, and the more money you are willing to spend the better the potential results, provided you are prepared to put an equal effort in time, research and learning.

[Jim M]

I use a 50D and I would suggest the 70-200 2.8 as well. I shoot drag racing and I shoot from trackside. I use a 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and a 100-400 IS as my main tools. I've gotten to like the 100-400 in my situation, although it is not a do-all lens. I should mention that I do a lot of shooting in less than ideal light, so an f/2.8 aperture is important to me for quicker focusing.

[Ingsy]

It depends on what you're going to use the images for, I guess. As an example, I use a 400D, with a 55-250IS and manage to get images that I'm happy with. Don't be fooled, you don't have to spend a fortune to get good images. I'm rubbish at snooker, if I spend £500 on a cue, I'll still
be rubbish at snooker. It's about more than equipment.

Sample images:

http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h384891e#h384891e
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h9791919#h9791919
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h9791919#h36418353
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h228b82af#h228b82af

[Titus213]

It depends on what you're going to use the images for, I guess. As an example, I use a 400D, with a 55-250IS and manage to get images that I'm happy with. Don't be fooled, you don't have to spend a fortune to get good images. I'm rubbish at snooker, if I spend £500 on a cue, I'll still
be rubbish at snooker. It's about more than equipment.

Sample images:

http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h384891e#h384891e
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h9791919#h9791919
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h9791919#h36418353
http://ingsy.zenfolio.com/p167708535/h228b82af#h228b82af

Nice set of images for sure.

What do you do when it pours down rain and gets dark and the meter says you need f4.0 at 1/200 just to get an image? If all your events are in the sun (and they get canceled if it rains too hard) you've got it made. Some of my best images have been taken with the original 18-55 kit lens. But, if you don't see the difference in what the equipment can and does produce you certainly don't need it.

[Ingsy]

Up the ISO.

Oh, and thanks.

EDIT - sorry, just realised how flippant that sounds! Kit can help, but there are ways around things when it gets dark. I guess my point really is that there are a lot of fantastic 'togs on here, with great kit, and it's so easy when you start out to think "damn, I need L glass to get good shots". I found myself thinking that way and it's a slippery slope (as well as expensive!), and then I realised the best way to for me to improve, was to learn how to get the most out of the kit that I've got. Then, when I've learnt enough to be held back by the limitations of current kit, I'll be good enough (hopefully!) to get the best out of a £1000 lens.

[dinanm3atl]

As said... budget? And where will you be shooting for?

I shoot with a pair of 40Ds. 70-200 f/2.8IS with a 2x TC if needed. Other body has a 12-24 f/4 or a 14-40 f/4L. Flash usually on that camera. So I have two ready to fire depending on where I am. Has worked great so far.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4079/4755773410_66c9af20db_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4080/4755779604_b4148a117a_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4755133319_df60c9f4f4_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4100/4755767684_65a7231e1c_b.jpg

[MaikuL]

Hey guys,

Awesome forum you have here, so much information as well as amazing photos to marvel over.

I guess this would be a good place to ask without creating a new thread. So I'm thinking about getting a 550D with the twin lens kit, how do you rate these for general and motorsport use? With 250mm to play with it seems like a fairly good option.

Here are a couple photos from my first try with a borrowed 350D and 50mm 1.8,
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/4954308342_588c12406a.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4954308490_bacd48e578.jpg

So let me have it, thanks. :)

[thumper 8]

I didn't see it mentioned, but for sports photography a good low mileage IDIIMkN is hard to beat. I just picked up one to keep my other IIn company - 7,500 shutter count and perfect shape for under $1,000 from the original owner. They are very reliable, fabulous AF and produce great shots.

The price of the Mk 1 70-200 2.8 IS (a great lens, as others have mentioned) has dropped a bit now that the MkII is out - a used IIn and a 70-200 2.8 IS is a great combo if it fits the budget.

[damnit]

40D, 50D, 7D + Canon 100-400 L will see you good for this stuff ... most of my motorsports shots to date have been done with 50D and this lens ... if you want to check out some of their potential website and flickr linked in sig. ;)

[nascarsbeanr48]

hey guys,i was gonna start a thread but i saw this one so i thought id post in here..i am considerably new to dslr cameras and i did my first shoot at nascar at auto club speedway this past october...i was wondering if i can get any advise from you guys and see what i can do to get better,etc...all i have is what is below...thanks again for your time

[sth_]

Don't worry about gear, what you have is good enough for a start.

What you could do better? Hard to say without seeing any pictures first... ;)

[nascarsbeanr48]

Don't worry about gear, what you have is good enough for a start.

What you could do better? Hard to say without seeing any pictures first... ;)

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=944740

thats the thread that has the pics

[sth_]

Most things have already been said in the other thread.

What modes were you using? Av/Tv/M or P/GreenBox?

Just a quick technical note (not motorsports-related): Looks like you're shooting JPG and have your camera set to "Adobe RGB" instead of "sRGB". Adobe RGB is better but when posting images on the web, it will cause the majority of viewers to see dull, washed out colors, since their browsers don't support color management and automatically assume the images to be sRGB.
But instead of just setting your camera to sRGB, I'd suggest shooting RAW and using a tool like Lightroom (not Photoshop) as your "Digital Darkroom".

[nascarsbeanr48]

Most things have already been said in the other thread.

What modes were you using? Av/Tv/M or P/GreenBox?

Just a quick technical note (not motorsports-related): Looks like you're shooting JPG and have your camera set to "Adobe RGB" instead of "sRGB". Adobe RGB is better but when posting images on the web, it will cause the majority of viewers to see dull, washed out colors, since their browsers don't support color management and automatically assume the images to be sRGB.
But instead of just setting your camera to sRGB, I'd suggest shooting RAW and using a tool like Lightroom (not Photoshop) as your "Digital Darkroom".

i was using manual mode...i shoot with jpeg because i am not familiar with raw processing i guess you can say..and i do not have any photo-editing programs but im working on it...thanks for replying and sorry it took a while for me to reply..

[adamsti]

Coming to this thread very late, but if it is road racing you are shooting, trackside or from the spectator areas the standard lens is the 500mm f/4. The 300 f/2.8, and the 70-200 f/2.8 as well. In the pits, the 17-40, or the 24-70.

[Ingsy]

Coming to this thread very late, but if it is road racing you are shooting, trackside or from the spectator areas the standard lens is the 500mm f/4.


Hahaha, because a beginner usually has £5,000 to spend on a lens, and has the experience and know how to get the best out of it.

[two40]

Look at the Tamron 17-50 2.8 for pits. Good performer for the price. ;)

[adamsti]

Hahaha, because a beginner usually has £5,000 to spend on a lens, and has the experience and know how to get the best out of it.

You want the truth, I gave it to the guy.

[aphphoto]

You want the truth, I gave it to the guy.

Nah. You gave him one version. Your version much more than his. His version will be substantially different.

[Flores]

more like he gave him the 'posters' vs '4x6' s version..

I'm making that journey myself... the fact is, you get tons of great snapshots with the 55-250, every once in a while, the lighting lines up enough you can get a great one.

with the faster glass, the great shots happen with regularity :)

[aphphoto]

more like he gave him the 'posters' vs '4x6' s version..

I don't understand your reference but, whatever, most of us live in the real world and start out with kit lenses, used or off-brand stuff.

[adamsti]

I don't understand your reference but, whatever, most of us live in the real world and start out with kit lenses, used or off-brand stuff.

I did too, but you quickly learn if you want killer shots there is no getting around you need a long lens to do this stuff.

[DC Fan]

I am wanting to buy a used Canon body and lenses with the primary use being Motorsports photography.

Because of the long distances that are typical of race tracks, long lenses are most useful.

http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/20101030c0006.jpg

270mm.


http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/201008271030a.jpg

340mm.


However, a long lens doesn't need to be an expensive lens. The above examples came from a US $500 Tokina 80-400mm, (http://www.tokinalens.com/products/tokina/afl-12.html) a reasonably-priced unit for the focal length range.

[dinanm3atl]

You want the truth, I gave it to the guy.


That is simply just not true. It depends on the track and where you are. Say Road Atlanta... If you are using the 500 you will need to leave the 'credential area' and go out into spectator areas to shoot down into the Esses. A 70-200 or 300mm IMO is more useful at Road Atlanta than lugging around a 500.

Is the 500 the 'motorsport lens of choice'? Probably. Doesn't mean I would say get that lens first off if you want to shoot motorsports. I would recommend renting a 300mm f/4 IS and a 1.4x TC... and experiment and see if that is what you want to do.

Furthermore if you are at Road Atlanta... you could shoot the whole thing with a 70-200 and if you want to get a little more reach a 300mm f/4 IS. Even if you are in the spectator area. Some spectator spots are within 6 inches of the credential areas. What do you lose? Some zoom compression? Look of a big 500mm?

First day of Petit 2010 I wore shorts because it was hot and I was just messing around... 70-200 @ 200mm on a Canon 40D... from spectator area at 10a/10b.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5049831516_08e5847400_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta BMW Rahal Letterman M3 7 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr

[dinanm3atl]

I did too, but you quickly learn if you want killer shots there is no getting around you need a long lens to do this stuff.


Just don't believe this is true...

75mm...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4126/5048537230_488f190a60_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5048537230/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta BMW Rahal Letterman M3 3 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5048537230/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr


300mm...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4154/5052333020_e2f07d40a9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5052333020/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta Porsche 911 4 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5052333020/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr


300mm...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/5048524262_ac240274ef_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5048524262/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta BMW Rahal Letterman M3 2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5048524262/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr


500mm IS is a great lens and it is a quality piece of equipment to have access to but just not required. It is fun though ;)


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/5051966651_63a49fec53_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5051966651/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta Porsche RS Spyder 3 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5051966651/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/5051968923_42601d9cb2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5051968923/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta Porsche 911 Falken Tire 4 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5051968923/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr

[Flores]

I don't understand your reference but, whatever, most of us live in the real world and start out with kit lenses, used or off-brand stuff.

i have plenty of used and off brand stuff. I _am_ in the real world.

my reference is simple: what looks good in a 4x6 print can often turn out to be blurry, hazy, and unsightly when you blow it up to a poster to hang in a garage.

The reach you need really depends on the track your at. and how much access you need. The tracks I shoot at, 500mm is required (and almost not enough) at some spots. in others, 200mm is too much :)

If your just shooting snapshots, you will be happy with the 55-250. when you get to the point when people are offering you money for your work, If your trying to do something a bit more commercial, the extra consistency and quality of higher quality lenses becomes a requirement, not a 'nice to have' option.

[aphphoto]

i have plenty of used and off brand stuff. I _am_ in the real world.


I didn't get the poster / 4x6 part, okay? I just switched to decaf so have a heart!
The real world comment wasn't directed at you - I thought it was pretty obviously directed at the guy who claimed to have given the OP the truth.

[adamsti]

That is simply just not true. It depends on the track and where you are. Say Road Atlanta... If you are using the 500 you will need to leave the 'credential area' and go out into spectator areas to shoot down into the Esses. A 70-200 or 300mm IMO is more useful at Road Atlanta than lugging around a 500.

Is the 500 the 'motorsport lens of choice'? Probably. Doesn't mean I would say get that lens first off if you want to shoot motorsports. I would recommend renting a 300mm f/4 IS and a 1.4x TC... and experiment and see if that is what you want to do.

Furthermore if you are at Road Atlanta... you could shoot the whole thing with a 70-200 and if you want to get a little more reach a 300mm f/4 IS. Even if you are in the spectator area. Some spectator spots are within 6 inches of the credential areas. What do you lose? Some zoom compression? Look of a big 500mm?

First day of Petit 2010 I wore shorts because it was hot and I was just messing around... 70-200 @ 200mm on a Canon 40D... from spectator area at 10a/10b.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5049831516_08e5847400_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta BMW Rahal Letterman M3 7 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr

I shoot all the time at Road America, I use all the of the lenses in my signature, but 99.99% of all the on track action is shot with the 70-200, 300, or the 500. This is the same whether I have a media access or from the spectator area. Obviously you don't need a 500, but it is very nice to have. Can I get similar shots with the 300? Yes, but then I have to crop to get the subject as large in the frame as it would be with the 500. I try to never crop anything other than to level horizons, or crop a stray body part out of a shot.

[Flores]

I didn't get the poster / 4x6 part, okay? I just switched to decaf so have a heart!
The real world comment wasn't directed at you - I thought it was pretty obviously directed at the guy who claimed to have given the OP the truth.

LOL

it's all good, mang.

[dinanm3atl]

I shoot all the time at Road America, I use all the of the lenses in my signature, but 99.99% of all the on track action is shot with the 70-200, 300, or the 500. This is the same whether I have a media access or from the spectator area. Obviously you don't need a 500, but it is very nice to have. Can I get similar shots with the 300? Yes, but then I have to crop to get the subject as large in the frame as it would be with the 500. I try to never crop anything other than to level horizons, or crop a stray body part out of a shot.


So you agree that you don't need a lens like a 500mm to get killer shots? I was just commenting on your comment as I don't find it to be true.

[DC Fan]

So you agree that you don't need a lens like a 500mm to get killer shots?

It all depends on distances, angles and conditions.

http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/20100528a1070.jpg

100mm.



http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/20091018aa0001.jpg

80mm.



http://www.kevinlillard.com/racing/20091025a0185.jpg

140mm.

Of course, there are going to be situations where the longest lens available is going to be the best one to use. But there will be many situations where shorter glass is best and extreme telephoto lenses are too long - or clumsy - to catch the action.

[adamsti]

So you agree that you don't need a lens like a 500mm to get killer shots? I was just commenting on your comment as I don't find it to be true.

No, for those of you with reading comprehension problems, here is part of my original post, "but if it is road racing you are shooting". Notice, ROAD RACING!! I'm not talking about NASCAR, Motocross, drag racing, or anything else. I specifically said road racing. If your shooting road racing, the 500 is something you are not going to want to be without.

Now when I go to the drag strip, do I take my 500 with me, no, of course not.

[philwillmedia]

Then there's the 10mm/2.8 fisheye.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2623/4013984388_c74b04d2c9.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2442/4013984494_8637f663a4.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2597/4013983676_fecba0a4a5.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2453/4013219149_9e40509c95.jpg

I've been shooting motorsport on all kinds of circuits and locations around Australia for over 20 years and have never owned a 500mm (except for a Tamron Mirror lens in the late 80's) and know of only one photog I regularly shoot with who owns a 500 of any description.
There's plenty with 300's and 400's but very few with a 500

[adamsti]

Down under things may differ, but at the ALMS race at Road America it's very hard to find anybody who is not carrying a 500 around with them, media of course, not the spectators.

[dinanm3atl]

No, for those of you with reading comprehension problems, here is part of my original post, "but if it is road racing you are shooting". Notice, ROAD RACING!! I'm not talking about NASCAR, Motocross, drag racing, or anything else. I specifically said road racing. If your shooting road racing, the 500 is something you are not going to want to be without.

Now when I go to the drag strip, do I take my 500 with me, no, of course not.

I quoted you... I saw what you wrote. I can also read... so don't appreciate the jab at me. As said you don't NEED it... sorry but I posted a slew of photos that are not from a 500mm that I believe are 'killer' shots. Since it appeared to be a 'new' person with zero bodies or lenses that simply is not the lens I would recommend.

[aphphoto]

If your shooting road racing, the 500 is something you are not going to want to be without.

It always amazes me how touchy some people get over this topic. :rolleyes:

I own and use a 500mm. Do I have to have it? No. Going through my stuff my best shots are under 200mm and I'm limiting this to stuff from public areas at many different tracks. The bulk of my favorites are between 80mm and 145mm.
Are there times when the 500mm is handy? Of course there are - but I'm not about to tell someone just starting out that he has to have one - he'll be thrilled with what he gets from a 75-300mm at this stage.

PS: slamming other people's reading comprehension is just not cool.:(

[adamsti]

It always amazes me how touchy some people get over this topic. :rolleyes:

I own and use a 500mm. Do I have to have it? No. Going through my stuff my best shots are under 200mm and I'm limiting this to stuff from public areas at many different tracks. The bulk of my favorites are between 80mm and 145mm.
Are there times when the 500mm is handy? Of course there are - but I'm not about to tell someone just starting out that he has to have one - he'll be thrilled with what he gets from a 75-300mm at this stage.

PS: slamming other people's reading comprehension is just not cool.:(

I call it as I see it. Don't like it, that's the way it is.

[aphphoto]

I call it as I see it. Don't like it, that's the way it is.

When you bring your report card home to Mom and Dad does it say "does not work and play well with others"?:lol:

[dinanm3atl]

When you bring your report card home to Mom and Dad does it say "does not work and play well with others"?:lol:


lulz

I chuckled.

[adamsti]

When you bring your report card home to Mom and Dad does it say "does not work and play well with others"?:lol:

I have been known to be blunt on occasion. If that offends you, I'm sorry. You know the saying about opinions and ---holes..... I'll just leave it at that.;)

[aphphoto]

I have been known to be blunt on occasion. If that offends you, I'm sorry. You know the saying about opinions and ---holes..... I'll just leave it at that.;)

Yeh, see, that's one of those meaningless statements that have become so popular these days. The "I'm sorry" part might as well read "tough sh!t".
People say things when they are behind a computer that they would never say to a stranger in person. Or, put another way, people who are blunt face to face sometimes get their teeth shoved down their throats.
Society seems to work best when certain niceties or conventions are observed. It isn't about political correctness - it's just about polite conversation.
Something about photography and the relevant forums seems to bring out the worst in people. I participate in forums for each of my interests and nowhere is the ego as much a part of it as it is in photography. People seem to have no problem at all talking down to others without knowing anything about their background or experience level. They spout off "knowedge" as if it is Holy Gospel and then fight like demons when someone offers a different point of view. I don't get it... but it sure is a huge turn-off.

[dinanm3atl]

I agree. A lot of this very forum is regurgitated 'expert' opinion. Which is just that. Opinion.

[MT Stringer]

When I go to the drag races, I know I won't have access to where the photogs are shooting so I have to do the best I can with my gear. That means shoot from the stands or go to the pit area and shoot the cars and people there. There is plenty to do and some good shots can be had. So you don't necessarily have to have the biggest lens or the best equip, just use what you have, shoot what you can and enjoy the races the rest of the time. Pretty simple really.

[aphphoto]

I agree. A lot of this very forum is regurgitated 'expert' opinion. Which is just that. Opinion.

Adamsti decided to take this private and remove any doubts I may have had about his character. :rolleyes:

[dinanm3atl]

Well I guess that is that.

[adamsti]

Adamsti decided to take this private and remove any doubts I may have had about his character. :rolleyes:

Yes I thought no need to go through this anymore. It's between us, and not helping the OP. As to aphphoto's character? I'll leave that for PM's.

Also, this is one of two fourms where I signed up using an old work username. All others I post on I use my real name only. Not to hard to figure it out with the website name. I don't like to hide behind usernames, but I have never got around to getting this one changed.
Tim Adams

[sigma pi]

When I go to the drag races, I know I won't have access to where the photogs are shooting so I have to do the best I can with my gear. That means shoot from the stands or go to the pit area and shoot the cars and people there. There is plenty to do and some good shots can be had. So you don't necessarily have to have the biggest lens or the best equip, just use what you have, shoot what you can and enjoy the races the rest of the time. Pretty simple really.
I was in a spectator area this past weekend. I did not have a media pass. I used my 70-200 and 7D. It was at night so I dont think my 55-250 would have done the job. I was shooting at f2.8 and iso 1000. The length meh I could have shot a little wider in some of the shots.

The pictures came out decent IMHO.
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/ken-block-invitational-gymkhana-grid/#3642177

[GSH]

The funniest thing about this thread is that whilst everyone's been throwing rocks at each other, nobody seems to have noticed that the OP signed up, made 1 post and hasn't bothered to return....

I really can't think why that would be.

[andrewhuxman]

Just buy the 500 and be done with it .......:D Best lens all around ,Reach IQ ,Speed pricy yes but worth every dollar

[aphphoto]

The funniest thing about this thread is that whilst everyone's been throwing rocks at each other, nobody seems to have noticed that the OP signed up, made 1 post and hasn't bothered to return....

I really can't think why that would be.

Nah, I noticed - but Adamsti struck a nerve when he got testy with somebody and I couldn't let it go 'cause it seems to be a frequent thing on the forums these days - one person who just has to over-state their case and then argue it to the death. Then come back with personal attacks when they don't get their way. :D

[andrewhuxman]

Nah, I noticed - but Adamsti struck a nerve when he got testy with somebody and I couldn't let it go 'cause it seems to be a frequent thing on the forums these days - one person who just has to over-state their case and then argue it to the death. Then come back with personal attacks when they don't get their way. :D

He is very good and very knowledgeable ...tells it like it is ,I have learned lots from him .

[aphphoto]

He is very good and very knowledgeable ...tells it like it is ,I have learned lots from him .

That's all well and good - and nobody ever questioned whether he was any good - but the "tells it like it is" bit is a B$ over-used copout of the last few years that should just go away already. It's B$ because it is an excuse for offensive behavior that nobody ever tolerated in the past. It's a copout because it's used to justify being offensive by saying you are just "telling it like it is". There's good reasons why most people don't get to behave like Simon Cowell - because most normal people won't stand for it for one.
There's a way of offering your opinion without being offensive and demeaning and rude. Unfortunately manners today are sadly lacking.
Nobody has ever been harmed by being pleasant and polite to others.

[dinanm3atl]

Interesting post APH. I agree.

[sigma pi]

That's all well and good - and nobody ever questioned whether he was any good - but the "tells it like it is" bit is a B$ over-used copout of the last few years that should just go away already. It's B$ because it is an excuse for offensive behavior that nobody ever tolerated in the past. It's a copout because it's used to justify being offensive by saying you are just "telling it like it is". There's good reasons why most people don't get to behave like Simon Cowell - because most normal people won't stand for it for one.
There's a way of offering your opinion without being offensive and demeaning and rude. Unfortunately manners today are sadly lacking.
Nobody has ever been harmed by being pleasant and polite to others.
good job telling it like it is :lol:

[whuband]

I always wonder what if real life, face to face personalities are the same as internet personalities. If so, there would sure be a lot of people with missing teeth.:)

[aphphoto]

I always wonder what if real life, face to face personalities are the same as internet personalities. If so, there would sure be a lot of people with missing teeth.:)
Many years ago, during the switch from BBS forums to web sites and internet forums, a wise man posted a sort of directive on how people might best communicate with strangers through this new medium. His advice was to conduct yourself as if you were speaking with a Clergyman whom you were meeting for the very first time. It's probably a bit over-the-top and a bit of a dated reference for most people but it can certainly do no harm to raise your standards instead of lowering them as most do today.
Your point is well taken - it's all to easy to come across as what I call a IBSD* when you are hiding behind a keyboard and an IP address.

*Internet Big Swinging Dick

[nascarsbeanr48]

That is simply just not true. It depends on the track and where you are. Say Road Atlanta... If you are using the 500 you will need to leave the 'credential area' and go out into spectator areas to shoot down into the Esses. A 70-200 or 300mm IMO is more useful at Road Atlanta than lugging around a 500.

Is the 500 the 'motorsport lens of choice'? Probably. Doesn't mean I would say get that lens first off if you want to shoot motorsports. I would recommend renting a 300mm f/4 IS and a 1.4x TC... and experiment and see if that is what you want to do.

Furthermore if you are at Road Atlanta... you could shoot the whole thing with a 70-200 and if you want to get a little more reach a 300mm f/4 IS. Even if you are in the spectator area. Some spectator spots are within 6 inches of the credential areas. What do you lose? Some zoom compression? Look of a big 500mm?

First day of Petit 2010 I wore shorts because it was hot and I was just messing around... 70-200 @ 200mm on a Canon 40D... from spectator area at 10a/10b.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5049831516_08e5847400_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/)
American Le Mans Series Petit Road Atlanta BMW Rahal Letterman M3 7 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dinanm3atl/5049831516/) by DinanM3atl (http://www.flickr.com/people/dinanm3atl/), on Flickr

all i used at the nascar race is what is on my signature...and i dont understand how there are lenses say 16-24 or something like that...whats all that all about...ive tried doing research on this stuff but damn it gets complicated!!! and dinanm3atl,did you see the pics on the other thread about nascar and see what i came out with..i want to shoot better shots before the next nascar go around in march before formula drift and the long beach grand prix in april..thansk for your time

[Flores]

all i used at the nascar race is what is on my signature...and i dont understand how there are lenses say 16-24 or something like that...whats all that all about...ive tried doing research on this stuff but damn it gets complicated!!! and dinanm3atl,did you see the pics on the other thread about nascar and see what i came out with..i want to shoot better shots before the next nascar go around in march before formula drift and the long beach grand prix in april..thansk for your time

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=4&LensComp=456&CameraComp=452&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3

this may help you make a decision on what you need to use.

[dinanm3atl]

all i used at the nascar race is what is on my signature...and i dont understand how there are lenses say 16-24 or something like that...whats all that all about...ive tried doing research on this stuff but damn it gets complicated!!! and dinanm3atl,did you see the pics on the other thread about nascar and see what i came out with..i want to shoot better shots before the next nascar go around in march before formula drift and the long beach grand prix in april..thansk for your time


I do not quite understand what you are asking. Want me to check out your shots and comment? Want to post some here?

[nascarsbeanr48]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=4&LensComp=456&CameraComp=452&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3

this may help you make a decision on what you need to use.

im sorry but i am totally confused!!!! lol

[nascarsbeanr48]

I do not quite understand what you are asking. Want me to check out your shots and comment? Want to post some here?

im basically asking what lenses with so little focal length like 16-24 or somethin like that do compared to a 50-200 you know?? and what lenses what you recommend for motorsports?? and here is the link to the thread my pics are in..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=944740

[aphphoto]

im basically asking what lenses with so little focal length like 16-24 or somethin like that do compared to a 50-200 you know?? and what lenses what you recommend for motorsports?? and here is the link to the thread my pics are in..

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=944740

This is based on using a consumer level camera to shoot mostly from the stands or what? Sorry if I've missed any information you've given previously.

[Flores]

im sorry but i am totally confused!!!! lol

LOL.

that is an archive of test shots with different lenses at different settings.

you should be able to pick lenses your interested in, and figure out which one has the ability to take the 'best' picture.

if it looks a little fuzzy, or has some color fringing in the test image, you can be certain your pictures will look the same way with that lens.

the lens selected on the left is the picture you see, if you move your mouse over the image, it will switch to the lens on the right.

[nascarsbeanr48]

This is based on using a consumer level camera to shoot mostly from the stands or what? Sorry if I've missed any information you've given previously.

well,for nascar i am shooting in the pit terraces right above the pits...and for the long beach grand prix,i will be shooting from anywhere i can find a good location to shoot from general admission..and i am using only the stuff in my signature bacause i didnt want to make any more bigger purchases until i pay these off ya know?

[gocolts]

Down under things may differ, but at the ALMS race at Road America it's very hard to find anybody who is not carrying a 500 around with them, media of course, not the spectators.

Agreed about Road America. I go there all the time for the vintage races and ALMS. I used a 100-400L down in turns 5-8 there this year, but am going to give the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 (I have a few TC's just in case) a try this year. I found the autofocus was a little slow with the 100-400, and cloud cover was really killing my results, so we'll see if I have any better luck with the Sigma.

Just an amateur here, but there's a lot of places at Road America where you can about stand right next to the press photographers...

[mcdd]

I shoot for a Snowmobile and ATV magazine and shoot most of my stuff with the 70-200 f/4L and 1D MKII. The 70-200 hasn't let me down yet, and while it would be nice to have the extra stop with the 2.8, I haven't run into to many situations where I was in dire need of a faster lens. As for the 1D MKII, they can be had for cheap now, and are brilliantly fast and accurate. That package shouldn't run you anymore then $1500.