lense for shooting mountain biking in woods

Looking for a lense for shooting mountain biking in the woods, will have reasonable light but would like a lense that i might avoid having to use flash in the right places. Ive been looking at Canon ef 85mm f1.8 usm lens, canon ef 100mm f2 usm lens and the canon ef-s 17-55mm f2.8 is usm lense. Anyone use any of these. Im used to telephoto lense's so any opinions would be great

Hi Anto, just noticed you are also based in Ireland!


I think you will struggle with prime lenses, mainly because you will never be able to guarantee the distances you will be shooting from. What lenses do you use with your 800D?

The 17-55 f2.8 would be much better than either the 85/100mm primes - also 100mm is quite a narrow FOV on a crop-sensor camera. You have no mention of budget but for the photography you seem to be interested in I would suggest that a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 (with/without IS or v1 or v2 depending on budget). The basic 70-200 f2.8 (without IS) is the cheapest. This would seem to me to be the best combo, from your gallery you have a photo of rally car racing and sometimes viewing points can be a distance away, whereas I assume you can get much closer to mountain bikers, hence the shortlist of the two lenses.

Not sure where you source your gear, but with sterling/euro prices you can get both these lenses much cheaper used/new in the UK. Try the likes of WEX / Calumet for second hand prices (they have a Belfast Store). I don't really trust buying off E-bay but there are other reputable stores selling used stock in the UK.

Regarding your other post, stating that you shoot video, the EF-S 18-135 Nano USM is fast focusing and is perfect for video and stills photography in good light but the drawback is f3.5-5.6 so perhaps not so ideal for stills photography in wooded areas.

24-105 f/4 has worked well for me on FF.

The need for fast shutter leads to the need for a fast lens, not that f/4 is fast, but it is at least not 5.6 ... thing is, shooting at less than 3.5 or 2.8 can be tricky with fast moving subjects and longer lenses.

85 1.8 is a fantastic option, but you would probably find yourself in situations where it was too long, especially on crop. Pair the 85 with wide prime 20/24/30 and I think you would be happy, so would your wallet.

I don’t get out shooting MTB as often as I would like but when I do I really prefer the perspective look of getting real close with wider angles. I have gotten great results with my Sigma 17-50 at 17/2.8. The Canon would do even better here. I have also had good results with my 85/1.8 more for road cycling but I really prefer using a zoom like my 70-200/4 IS and having the zoom’s flexibility. I would also like to get a UWA like the 10-22 or Tamron 10-24 VC that is still pretty fast at 3.5 at the wide end for cycling.

It's hard to say without knowing what conditions you're going to be under. If you're going to be on the sideline of a pre-determined trail, then I'd side with telephoto distances. Example: being on the downhill part of a trail, you can zoom between 70-200mm when seeing your cyclist just entering frame. If you're in a sharper turn, then maybe you need a wider angle (for me, I'd just decide between 70-200 or 24-70mm on FF). I've done quite a few road cycling races, and my default now is my 5D3 with 70-200mm 2.8L II. That's a great range for being 200 when they're coming in, and then 70mm when they're rounding the curve (I usually stay at a corner). You don't mention if you have FF or crop, but at least with FF, I wouldn't think you could get in anything wider then normal focal lengths (though you do ask about 17-55mm EF-S, so it's probable you're talking about crop). 17-55mm might be good for up close with a cyclist right on you, but you might want a longer lens for a cyclists further away. If you have a more recent camera, perhaps you also can tolerate higher ISOs and could consider the 18-135mm nano USM.

i have a 70 - 200 already, it f4 which works for outside tree free grand. i also have the 55 - 250 stm and 18 - 55 stm and 11 - 16 stm which i use for video only. i would like the 70 - 200 f2.8 but could only afford the f4 is version which i got for 500 euro and its a lovely lense, ignore them photos in my gallery they are years ol when i had my 1dmk3 and 300mm f2.8 which i sold

the 70 - 200 is grand when in open space, but sometimes ive at 70mm is too much. its all downhill on twisty trails so the 70 - 200 wont work. i aim on getting a second body and having a lense on both so i am covered. the 17 - 70 f2.8 has good reviews and seems to be popular with biking. i guess the 17 - 70mm and the 2.8 version of my 70 - 200 would be perfect but upgrading the 70 - 200 will have to wait

I would try the 24-70 f2.8 lens - I use it a lot for shooting off road events in the woods (Land Rovers) and its my most versatile lens.