Sports photography

Dman

Dman

Messages
3,656
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
I'd like to start doing a bit of sports shooting, not paid for but for fun. I currently have a 55-200mm non VR which does me ok for shooting my local 5k every weekend, but my local non league team would like me to take some pics for the programme and website, which I'm happy to do. However, I don't think this lens is going to cut it (definitely not in low light or floodlit games I wouldn't have thought), so I'm looking at a 70-300mm VR lens now.

Although the extra focal length will be better, an f/4.5-f/5.6 isn't really going to cut it is it? Also, is the VR absolutely necessary if using a monopod or could I go for one of the older 300mm f/4 AF lenses and get just as good results? This would save me a lot of money.

Any thoughts from those who shoot sports?

Thanks
 
You don't need VR for sports. You need fast glass - f/4 - or preferably f/2.8 - I use a 80-200mm AF-D f/2.8 and the 300mm AF-S f/4 - I would say that would be the minimum. 400mm could be useful too for football.
 
Dman said:
I'd like to start doing a bit of sports shooting, not paid for but for fun. I currently have a 55-200mm non VR which does me ok for shooting my local 5k every weekend, but my local non league team would like me to take some pics for the programme and website, which I'm happy to do. However, I don't think this lens is going to cut it (definitely not in low light or floodlit games I wouldn't have thought), so I'm looking at a 70-300mm VR lens now.

Although the extra focal length will be better, an f/4.5-f/5.6 isn't really going to cut it is it? Also, is the VR absolutely necessary if using a monopod or could I go for one of the older 300mm f/4 AF lenses and get just as good results? This would save me a lot of money.

Any thoughts from those who shoot sports?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I've just started out this year myself shooting bicycle races here in Ireland.My friend has been doing it a lot longer and advised me to invest in the glass(lenses) first.He also told me that the bare minimum is f/2.8 glass for sports photography.He said these are fast lenses and will help get the shots you need.I started off buying a 17-55mm f/2.8 for the wide angle shot, and a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS telephoto.Then bought a 24-70mm f/2.8 L.Next year i'm looking at a 300mm f/2.8 IS.

Great news this that you have someone to shoot for.I find it hard to shoot when only for myself...:)
 
f/2.8 would be great, but they're too expensive for me, even for 200mm. Confirms my fears though that even at f/4 it's not going to be fast enough, even for winter afternoons.
 
Look for secondhand stuff mate.I'll be going down that route myself soon...;)
 
A pro photographer once told me that no matter how small, your work is worth something!! People love getting free stuff,and the minute you ask for something they usually don't ask anymore. A lot of people i know are going to be disappointed next year..
 
Pinarello said:
A pro photographer once told me that no matter how small, your work is worth something!! People love getting free stuff,and the minute you ask for something they usually don't ask anymore. A lot of people i know are going to be disappointed next year..
Click to expand...

Yes, but they're my local club and as a supporter I'm happy to give them a few photos, they give me free entry in return.
 
You'll just have to up your ISO - I'm often shooting at 3200 + ISO in winter.
 
you need 300mm as an absolute minimum on a 1.3 crop and preferably 400mm. ideally you want two bodies one with a 70-200 or a shortish prime around the 100-150mm range and one with the longer lens.

I can't speak from experience but the Siggy 120-300mm is a cracking lens, but i dont know how the AF would perform under what passes as "floodlights" at most grounds.

best case scenario is 3200 for a night match unless your at a decent ground
 
Without hi-jacking this thread too much, I am after a 70-300mm to replace my 55-200mm but is it worth it? Am I really going to notice the difference of that extra 100mm as that is the main reason for purchasing (and the macro mode but I don't hold that up to much over a true macro lens).

My interest is in wildlife but I would like to do some sports too, I know I can't afford a fast lens so is it worth upgrading for extra reach?
 
Dman said:
Yes, but they're my local club and as a supporter I'm happy to give them a few photos, they give me free entry in return.
Click to expand...

I totally understand what you mean.You and i would do it for the love of our team/sport...:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top