Lens recommendations please

[Wile_E]

Here is my situation. Please recommend me a lens for each senario to enable me to capture the picture.

1 - Indoor hockey under flouresent lighting. I was thinking an 85 F1.8 might be my best bet.

2 - Go-carting at night under parking lot type lights. I figured I would need an external flash regardless of lens choice for this situation.

Sadly, I'm not a rich man so price is an issue. Keep that in mind before suggesting the top of the line lens.

Would the 85 F1.8 and a 430 EX be enough to work in both situations?

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Wile_E

Would the 85 F1.8 and a 430 EX be enough to work in both situations?

I think that may depend on how close you can get to the action.

[Psychic1]

I shoot Hockey with the 135L but the 100-F2 will definitely do, if you are on a budget, and the 200L is definitely too long. No one uses a flash, it blinds the players and the parents(mothers) get into fights.
I would not use the flash for the go carts, it will distract the racers, the 100-F2 should also be fine.

[kidpower]

For your budget either the 85 1.8 or 100 F2 should give you decent results.

I shoot a lot of sports and shot high school hockey the other night for the first time. Used a 85 1.8. It did an excellent job. My best shots were when the action was at my end. I shot first row thru the glass (depends on the glass as to how your photos will turn out). I also shot from above, over the glass. Great shots, but needed more reach for those in your face photos. Nonetheless, I was happy.

I probably would not use flash for either. From what I remember about go-cart tracks, they seem to have lighting where the cars go in and out of bright/dark pockets. Focus around the brighter areas.

As previously mentioned, how close you are is an issue.

The above are two great "budget" indoor sport lenses.

[Wile_E]

With the hockey, I will be right next to the glass and I'd be even closer to the action with the carting.

I'm sure I'll be happy with the 85mm focal length, I just want to make sure I won't end up with blurry and underexposed pics.

[italypa99]

70-200 F2.8L would do nice

[Wile_E]

Originally Posted by italypa99

70-200 F2.8L would do nice

Would that be fast enough to stop action under low light conditions?

[Wile_E]

[Wile_E]

Originally Posted by italypa99

70-200 F2.8L would do nice

Originally Posted by Wile_E

Would that be fast enough to stop action under low light conditions?

Would this lens be capable? My Tamron 17-50 F2.8 got some decent shot when I wasn't shooting through the glass. Is 2.8 enough or do I need the 1.8 on the prime?

I'm sure this would be a nice lens to have but i don't want to get it right now if it's not capable of getting the pics in these situations.

[Psychic1]

Originally Posted by Wile_E

Would this lens be capable? My Tamron 17-50 F2.8 got some decent shot when I wasn't shooting through the glass. Is 2.8 enough or do I need the 1.8 on the prime?

I'm sure this would be a nice lens to have but i don't want to get it right now if it's not capable of getting the pics in these situations.

Wile_E:
Prior to digital, when I first started I shot hockey with a 75-300 4.5/5.6 and 3200 B&W film.
Set your ISO1600 and shoot AV 4.5, if you are below 250sec go to ISO3200(H).
The beauty of digital is - it cost nothing to experiment.
Go have some fun.

[italypa99]

from what im told it would be just fine for that kind of stuff i just got it for myself today but i have done a lot of post on it and read on it a lot i was going to get the F4 but i went with the F2.8 because of just that i wanted to be able to do indoor stuff as well and get great pics and everyone told me on here that it was the way to go so just telling what i was told but i will know shortly =]

[liza]

For what you want to do, the 100 f/2 would probably be ideal. I own both the 85mm and 100mm lenses and find them to be equally capable in low light. The focal length of the 100 would likely be better for your specific needs.

[dlpasco]

I shoot hockey - not great but getting better (I think ) and read alot of posts by other hockey shooters on the Sports forum. I have a 70-200 f/2.8L and sometimes wish I had more reach. Even when the action is in my end I find that I want a lot of reach for action on the far side. In most rinks the f/2.8 is fast enough but I'm almost always at ISO 1600 and in a few rinks I am at 3200. Here's a sample taken at 200mm on a 30D of a play along the far boards roughly even with my position. This is an outdoor rink so lighting is not a problem during the day.

Dan

[italypa99]

Originally Posted by dlpasco

I shoot hockey - not great but getting better (I think ) and read alot of posts by other hockey shooters on the Sports forum. I have a 70-200 f/2.8L and sometimes wish I had more reach. Even when the action is in my end I find that I want a lot of reach for action on the far side. In most rinks the f/2.8 is fast enough but I'm almost always at ISO 1600 and in a few rinks I am at 3200. Here's a sample taken at 200mm on a 30D of a play along the far boards roughly even with my position. This is an outdoor rink so lighting is not a problem during the day.

Dan

use the 1.4X for more reach it works nicly