LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Need a roller derby lens!?

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 03 Jun 2010 (Thursday) 17:51   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
CarbonFly
Member
CarbonFly's Avatar
Joined Oct 2006
34 posts
Columbia, SC
[MORE/SHARE]

I have read all of the stickied articles and searched across the net about primes vs zoom, etc.

In the past month I have become the unofficial "official" photographer for my wife's roller derby team. Shooting fast sports combined with a low-light indoor setting has surpassed the limits of my 17-85mm and 70-300mm lens. Even when I use my 580EXII flash I can't get enough light, etc to catch a good shot of the action. For the past 2 bouts I have been relegated to using my 50mm 1.8 as it is the only lens that gets enough light for a good shot. BUT.....it's still slow to focus. So, I put all my lenses up on eBay and have decided to go for quality.

Right now I'm thinking that the 24-70mm 2.8L is my best bet, but a friend who is a professional photographer suggested I get a 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 instead to use. My problem with this is that I sit track-side for the photos and depending on where the action is during the roller derby I feel that the zoom would be better to allow me to get the shot. Switching primes depending on where the action is on the track would be really difficult during a bout.

Would the 24-70 be fast enough? Or are the primes listed above faster and necessary?

What does everyone think?

As a side note, do you think that a monopod would be a good idea to help stabalize the photos since the 24-70 has no IS. (recommendations?)

Post #1, Jun 03, 2010 17:51:27


Canon EOS 40D | Canon 24-70mm 2.8L | Canon EF 50mm II f1.8 | Speedlite 580EX II | Canon BG-E2N Grip | Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Viva-photography
Goldmember
Viva-photography's Avatar
Joined Feb 2010
1,442 posts
Arkansas
[MORE/SHARE]

I would go prime.
The difference between 2.8 and 1.8 can be huge.

Post #2, Jun 03, 2010 17:54:45


jaredholtphoto.comexternal link
Canon 5D Mark II// Canon 85mm f/1.8//Sigma 35mm f/1.4//Canon 70-200 f/4L

LOG IN TO REPLY
dan_bgblue
Senior Member
dan_bgblue's Avatar
Joined May 2008
632 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

f2.8 will not likely be fast enough. Can you move away from track side? If so you might rent the 85mm f1.8 for a bout, and see if you can find a place to get the action you want with only that lens. The 85mm f1.8 focuses very fast.

jmho

Post #3, Jun 03, 2010 19:30:55 as a reply to Viva-photography's post 1 hour earlier.


Gear list: S5IS, 40D, Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS, Canon 70-200 f4 L IS, Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM, Canon 50mm f1.8 mk1, Canon 85mm f1.8, Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM, 430EXII, Kenko 1.4x TC, tripod

LOG IN TO REPLY
eddyav
Senior Member
Joined Nov 2007
348 posts
Muskegon,MI
[MORE/SHARE]

Mono pod won't help-slow shutter and fast moving subjects.The 85 f1.8 is a fast focusing lens,but is it the focal lenth that you need?I suggest that you find the FL that you need and buy primes (85 f1.8 and 135 f2L come first in mind to me).It seems that you can use flash so if you get good with using flash then you might get away with a f2.8 (zoom) lens,but a faster lens is the better option.The zoom also has advantages,but the primes are faster.

Post #4, Jun 03, 2010 20:21:48


7D (gripped),Tokina 12-24 4.0,Canons;24-70L 2.8,50 1.8mk1,70-200L 4.0 IS,300L 4.0 IS,400L 5.6.,TC 1.4II Speedlights:580EXII,22​0SX-2 AB 800 w/ stands,monopods,tripod​s,bags,filters,etc...

LOG IN TO REPLY
HeaTransfer
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2010
554 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

If you're allowed to use flash ... keep trying. I know I would.

As for a 2.8 zoom being sufficiently fast; it's easy to figure out, based on what shutter speed (and ISO) you were able to get with the 50/1.8.

Post #5, Jun 03, 2010 21:15:15




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Cesium
Goldmember
Joined Jun 2009
1,959 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

85 f/1.8

Post #6, Jun 03, 2010 21:25:08




LOG IN TO REPLY
czeglin
Senior Member
czeglin's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
558 posts
Rockville, MD
[MORE/SHARE]

Were you using direct flash? Try bouncing it. I had maybe a 50 ft ceiling in a building like a hangar. With the flash head zoomed to 105 you'll be surprised how much you get. You will need to keep the SS up though to avoid ghosting.

I tried to photograph derby once using my 17-55 and 50mm f/1.8. Honestly neither is suited for this. The zoom was too slow and the "nifty" fifty sucks hard in low light. It just can't focus.

I think you need better than ISO 3200 and f/2. I think the 85 f/1.8 is probably the best lens for the job. I think the best position is coming out of the turn. From that location they'll be facing you as they turn, which is the most exciting action. I think the 85 will be a good length for that. The 135L if you need tighter.

Post #7, Jun 03, 2010 21:47:45


Flickrexternal link | Gear & Feedback | DIY Padded Inserthttp://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=10900470#post10​900470

LOG IN TO REPLY
godzakka
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2007
348 posts
Jacksonville, FL
[MORE/SHARE]

I've shot many a random sport, inside and outside, and I find that zooms are perfectly fine. Indoor amateur hockey has crappy lighting and still my 70-200/4 on a 1D classic at ISO1600 was able to pull 1/500 shutter speeds.

Here's my "but..."
You sit track side, so get a wide angle (say Tamron 17-50/2.8 or similar) and aim to get the shots right in front of you. Keep the lens pre-focused and stay wide to lesson OOF areas. Forget about the other side of the track, b/c you're likely to capture 25% of the action right in front of you 100% of the time.
Or...
Get a longer zoom (or prime) and focus on action across the rink. Then you're likely to capture the 25% of the action away from you...maybe 100% of the time.
Or...
Set your shutter to 1/20th or so, set your flash to max power and capture some awesome blur with sharp skaters mixed in. Awesome effect!

Use the flash at the maximum power needed to support your shot, not capture your shot. I mean, your camera should be okay to capture 1/250 or higher in crappy light when pushed to ISO1600 or ISO3200 and using an f/2.8 lens. The flash just "fills in" the dark areas and highlights the light areas if you're tuning it right. You can switch between lenses all during the derby, but you will never find a single one lens fits all solution.

And for what it's worth, what size are you printing these out? Anything less than 8x12", and probably anything less than 12x16", ISO3200 wide open on any decent lens should produce stunning images with NO post processing, regardless of what lots of people worry about here. I speak from experience. I shot a motocross at f/4 (70-200/4), ISO3200, 1/whatever-I-could-get (which was about 1/500th at best) and then when I got home, opened the JPEGS (yes, JPEGs!) in Google Picasa, auto-adjusted the color and contrast, then cropped to about 1/3 of the original image, exported to Photoshop (CS2) and sharpened lightly, printed at 8x10", hung on my wall at work, and from outside of 3" you can't even see the graininess and "noise." No one has said, wow, that's noisy. Instead, it's usually, wow, my photos never come out like that!

If your images are going up on the web it's even less of an issue, since most screens are nowhere near the resolution you are going to print at.

But I digress...push your ISO as high as you can, see what kinds of shutter speeds you can get, decide if you want to shoot near or far, then use that to determine your lens needs. Good luck and feel free to ask me more if you want details.

Post #8, Jun 03, 2010 22:27:33




LOG IN TO REPLY
CarbonFly
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
CarbonFly's Avatar
Joined Oct 2006
34 posts
Columbia, SC
[MORE/SHARE]

Thank you all so much. I'm going to try to absorb all of this info in and test it out at the next bout. The pictures are mainly for the purposes of being posted on the team website.

I truly think that my skills at shooting low light action provide as much of a barrier to getting a good photo as does having the proper lens. Low light/action pics have proven to be devastatingly frustrating. When sitting trackside, I position myself on the corner as the girls exit the turn because straight-aways are usually boring shots. Falls and hits happen on the corners. Depending on if the skater is coming into or out of the turn it would be nice to have the zoom to adjust the shot.

I think that I might go with the 24-70mm 2.8L and the 85mm 1.8 and see how that works out for me.

Post #9, Jun 04, 2010 07:17:14


Canon EOS 40D | Canon 24-70mm 2.8L | Canon EF 50mm II f1.8 | Speedlite 580EX II | Canon BG-E2N Grip | Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home

LOG IN TO REPLY
hsmoscout
Goldmember
hsmoscout's Avatar
Joined Oct 2009
1,166 posts
Camera Addicts Anonymous
[MORE/SHARE]

maybe a wider prime like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4?

Post #10, Jun 04, 2010 07:41:08


My Gear
˙ʇsod uı ʇı xıɟ

LOG IN TO REPLY
elysium
"full of stupid banter"
elysium's Avatar
Joined Jul 2007
11,619 posts
Harrow/London/UK/GB/That Part Of The World/Next To France
[MORE/SHARE]

To be honest, depends on the venue. Quite a lot of gyms around the UK and venues I have shot at have had decent lighting BUT 2.8 still requires a real high ISO to start with to really freeze any action.

It really depends on the track. Best thing to do is get in touch with a US based shooter, Axel Adams who is one of the best Roller Derby photographers period. Met him at a UK tournament and a great dude.

Are you shooting flat or banked track roller derby?

Flat track I find is great looking down the main straight (players facing me on the start line). For those, depending on the track, anywhere between 50-135mm is perfect IMO. I have never really gone wide, main reason is these women have a habit of flying towards photographers. Closer you are, less chance to get out of the way.

In all essence, it just boils down to what you want, slow shutters for the pans. So 2.8 wont really be a problem. I usually run AV and just stop the lens down to pan. Suppose TV would do the same. Best is a wide lens and to stick yourself on the curve.

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/4287672960_430b87d2be.jpg

As the jammers are released after the main pack, it takes half a track for them to catch up and pass so by the time the come back round, you have some heated blocking. (illegal move here)

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045/4452119859_0464ecf6db.jpg

Banked track should be a bit more interest, would love the opportunity for that.

Ill drop you a PM with some extra stuff

Mitesh

Post #11, Jun 04, 2010 07:57:43 as a reply to CarbonFly's post 40 minutes earlier.


Everyday, a programmer finds a way of creating an idiotproof program. Everyday, the universe spits out another idiot.....So far, the universe if winning

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
plasticmotif
Goldmember
plasticmotif's Avatar
Joined Sep 2008
3,154 posts
Tennessee
[MORE/SHARE]

85 1.8 or 100 f2 are great choices. They focus fast....

Post #12, Jun 04, 2010 09:09:54


Mac P.
My Zenfolioexternal link My Photo Blogexternal link My Equipment
http://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=14172975#post14​172975

LOG IN TO REPLY
bigarchi
Senior Member
bigarchi's Avatar
Joined Mar 2008
962 posts
upstate ny
[MORE/SHARE]

i'm late to the thread, but what did you end up chosing? i've been using my 17-55 mostly for roller derby this season, but would probably be happier with the 24-70 range in a zoom. i've personally been lusting after the 85 1.8 for derby bouts though..

Post #13, Jun 29, 2010 21:09:40 as a reply to plasticmotif's post 25 days earlier.


~Mitch

my gear and feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
CarbonFly
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
CarbonFly's Avatar
Joined Oct 2006
34 posts
Columbia, SC
[MORE/SHARE]

I went with the 24-70 because if fit my needs at derby and for other events. Ill get the 85 1.8 later.

Post #14, Jul 01, 2010 13:13:18


Canon EOS 40D | Canon 24-70mm 2.8L | Canon EF 50mm II f1.8 | Speedlite 580EX II | Canon BG-E2N Grip | Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home

LOG IN TO REPLY
bigarchi
Senior Member
bigarchi's Avatar
Joined Mar 2008
962 posts
upstate ny
[MORE/SHARE]

CarbonFly wrote in post #10460985external link
I went with the 24-70 because if fit my needs at derby and for other events. Ill get the 85 1.8 later.

yeah, sounds like a good plan to me. i know i would be pretty happy with that combo trackside at derby bouts!

Post #15, Jul 01, 2010 15:40:55


~Mitch

my gear and feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
7,248 views & 0 likes for this thread
Need a roller derby lens!?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.0015 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
951 guests, 826 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is alexgr

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.