What lens for sports?

Paul Male

Paul Male

Messages
1,462
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok I'm sure this has been asked before but I thought I would just ask again ........... lol.

I'm looking to start off doing a bit of sports mostly MTB, Rally and some racing track action.

I know I will need some Looooong glass for some of it but I'm looking at starting with a 70 - 200 L lens.

My questions are;

1. Do I really need F2.8 or is the F4 sufficient?

2. Do I really need to spend extra on IS?

This lens will obviously be used on occasion for some scenery and wildlife work as well but rarely.

Thanks in advance for any advice.
 
F/4 is fine outdoors, f/2.8 is essential for indoor sport. F/2.8 will also help outside when its dull, its surprising how much light you lose when its overcast.

F/2.8 will also be essential if you decide to add a TC to your lens, as I did, later on.

I have a non IS lens (Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM II) and the only time is wished I had IS is at 400mm with my x2 attached, but I still do well without it!
 
odd jim said:
F/4 is fine outdoors, f/2.8 is essential for indoor sport. F/2.8 will also help outside when its dull, its surprising how much light you lose when its overcast.

F/2.8 will also be essential if you decide to add a TC to your lens, as I did, later on.

I have a non IS lens (Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM II) and the only time is wished I had IS is at 400mm with my x2 attached, but I still do well without it!
Click to expand...

Excellent advice, thankyou.
 
I use my 70-200 for rallying and Le Mans (where I use it with a 1.4 exii).

I went for the F4 IS as the mode 2 IS is useful for panning and the IS models are weathersealed which, if you're into rallying you will know, is very useful! My shutter speeds are rarely and issue that would require f2.8 (I am mostly panning so quite long exposures anyway) and the weight reduction comes in useful when clambering through forest stages with another 1 series body and lens, spare batteries etc are all hung off my waterproofs.
 
This is interesting, as I was reading a Ken Rockwell review on a lens I've just purchased (Nikon 70-300 VR), specifically for investing more time in my Rugby photography.

Ken was saying that for action/moving shots, the VR wont help at all, and is mostly useful for handheld stationary shot...

I'm going to be shooting a match today with this new lens so I guess i'll find out how it helps and how much better than the Tamron 70-300 its replacing!
 
I always turn off VR for sporting events, I only use it for stationary shots.
 
Nikon Fan said:
I always turn off VR for sporting events, I only use it for stationary shots.
Click to expand...

Why?

IS still helps for fast moving stuff, anything that keeps the frame steady can only be an advantage, whatever you are shooting.

I never understand why people disable their IS (unless it's on a tripod), it makes no common sense!!
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
I never understand why people disable their IS (unless it's on a tripod), it makes no common sense!!
Click to expand...

Rubbish!

because it slows the AF down... that good enough? :) 99% of time its off on my 400 and 70-200.
 
KIPAX said:
Rubbish!

because it slows the AF down... that good enough? :) 99% of time its off on my 400 and 70-200.
Click to expand...

It has no effect on AF!

I've never experienced AF slowdown while using IS on any stabilised lens.
 
odd jim said:
It has no effect on AF!
Click to expand...

Really? So when I am shooting football (or anything) and I have to quickly focus on somehting.. it takes noticably longer for the IS to kick in and auto focus than it does without...

explain?
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
Really? So when I am shooting football and I ahve to quickly focus on somehting.. it takes noticably longer for the IS to kick in and auto focus than it does without...

explain?
Click to expand...

So why when I shoot F1 cars and showjumping, leaving IS on makes no difference to my AF.

Explain?

With the camera in AI Servo it'll track and focus as efficiently and quickly with IS active as with IS deactivated.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
So why when I shoot F1 cars and showjumping, leaving IS on makes no difference to my AF.

Explain?
Click to expand...

Is there something wrong with you? your telling everyone that using IS does not slow down the AF ...It does.. your saying because you never experience it then it doesnt.... like me saying I have never had a heart attack so they dont exist

Are you really saying that becasue you dont experience somethign then it must not exist? ...seriously?
 
Lol no!

With a camera constantly focusing (as above) IS doesn't make a difference.

The *start* of the AF will be initially delayed by IS settling, but once this has settled it'll track and focus as quickly as without.

I've used plenty of kit over the years and never once experienced a difference.

If there is a good solid engineering answer as to why it does slow it down, of course I'm open to learning it!
 
odd jim said:
The *start* of the AF will be initially delayed by IS settling, but once this has settled it'll track and focus as quickly as without.
Click to expand...

So why tell the whole of TP that IS doesnt effect AF when it does? Oh you just looked it up did you?

its called MISSINFORMATION :(
 
scottthehat said:
i thought that is/os/vr slowed down af speed, but i was told on here by lots of people it makes no difference.
the only thing i can think of it that you have to wait for the is/os/vr to settle.
Click to expand...

Correct.and it wont AF until it does. and in a lot of peoples photogrpahy that wait although a second or less can lose them the shot.. IS effects AF so the comment that it makes no sense to turn it off is as I said.. rubbish :)
 
KIPAX said:
So why tell the whole of TP that IS doesnt effect AF when it does? Oh you just looked it up did you?

its called MISSINFORMATION :(
Click to expand...

No it's not.

Yours saying it effects AF.

The truth is AF itself is not affected.

The IS needs to settle, but once this has done so, AF performs as normal, so when shooting sport in AI servo, rear button focusing active, tracking a subject, it will AF, lock, unlock etc with IS active the entire time without any slowdown or any difference in AF reaction time.

So no, AF as a mechanical function overall isn't affected.

But who cares, come on! I don't think the whole of TP hangs on my every word, lol!
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
Correct.and it wont AF until it does. and in a lot of peoples photogrpahy that wait although a second or less can lose them the shot.. IS effects AF so the comment that it makes no sense to turn it off is as I said.. rubbish :)
Click to expand...
my d300 and d700 both still autofucus with the os/vr not settled i use bbf and when i want i just hold the shutter it still focuses no probs and i cant see no speed drop and if there is i cant see it, but personally i turn it of for my panning shots and i dont use active on my nikon lenses and mode 2 on my sigmas which is designed for panning.

from wiki

Nikon's more recent VR-enabled lenses offer an 'Active Mode' that is intended to be used when shooting from a moving vehicle, such as a car or boat, and should correct for larger shakes than the 'Normal Mode'.[7] However, Active Mode, when used under normal shooting conditions, can result in poorer results than the 'Normal Mode'
 
KIPAX said:
I would have thought the people your giving the advice to would care..

Off to shoot footy now wiht IS off :)
Click to expand...

Well yes I suppose so, and I hope they heed my advice as use IS, on servo modes at least.

Try shooting with it on and see if you notice a difference. I'd be amazed if it did and you never know, you might get more keepers*!

*(football joke!)
 
Last edited:
I shoot mountain biking with a 70-200mm f4 non IS and Havent had a problem, depending of what you are shoot i would recommend the f4 but i am hoping to upgrade to the 2.8 soon as a lot of mtb is in dark woods so will help a lot.
 
Can't see how is helps for sport, generally at shutters quick enough to freeze action you shouldn't have shake.

I get that 2 stage is can help with panning though along the horizontal axis of movement.
 
Surrey_gareth said:
Ken was saying that for action/moving shots, the VR wont help at all, and is mostly useful for handheld stationary shot...
Click to expand...
I'd disagree with that, with a note that there are two settings for the VR on the 70-300. One damps all movement, the other only damps vertical movement so that the lens can be used for panning shots. I got acceptable (for me!) results panning cars at Knockhill with it.

DSC_0030sml.jpg
 
KIPAX said:
Correct.and it wont AF until it does. and in a lot of peoples photogrpahy that wait although a second or less can lose them the shot.. IS effects AF so the comment that it makes no sense to turn it off is as I said.. rubbish :)
Click to expand...

Technically, using IS should improve AF, as the image is more stable and it can lock on easier. That info comes from Canon (Chuck Westfall).

That may or may not make a difference in practise but the contrary view, that IS slows down AF, has no basis in theory or practise that I'm aware of.

Edit: Ken should always be taken with a pinch of salt, and read in full context. He knows what he's talking about, even if his interpreation of the facts is a bit skewed sometimes. IS mode 2 will help with panning at slower speeds, and in a constant horizontal or vertical direction, but it's of no benefit when when shutter speeds are high anyway and if you're moving the camera about a bit eratically, birds in flight or maybe soccer ;) for example, then there's a danger that the IS won't work or even fight against you.
 
Last edited:
The IS adds a considerable amount of cost to the lens which is why I was unsure, I'm not a wealthy person by any means but I don't want to go and buy a lens that will leave me wanting, also at the same time I really don't want to waste money on a feature I very rarely need.

You can get the F4 IS for the price of a F2.8 but the 2.8 IS is nearly double that which is why I asked what I did ......... lol.

Thanks for the input guys, even if it did start a debate off ......... lol.
 
Last edited:
Surrey_gareth said:
This is interesting, as I was reading a Ken Rockwell review on a lens I've just purchased (Nikon 70-300 VR), specifically for investing more time in my Rugby photography.

Ken was saying that for action/moving shots, the VR wont help at all, and is mostly useful for handheld stationary shot...

I'm going to be shooting a match today with this new lens so I guess i'll find out how it helps and how much better than the Tamron 70-300 its replacing!
Click to expand...
Uncle Kens a total Gobsheite, i mean seriously, look at the guy, you wouldnt let him baby sit for you so why would you listen to him.

Oh and for shooting action sports IS is a waste of money unless using slow shutter speed panning.
 
Paul Male said:
The IS adds a considerable amount of cost to the lens which is why I was unsure, I'm not a wealthy person by any means but I don't want to go and buy a lens that will leave me wanting, also at the same time I really don't want to waste money on a feature I very rarely need.

You can get the F4 IS for the price of a F2.8 but the 2.8 IS is nearly double that which is why I asked what I did ......... lol.

Thanks for the input guys, even if it did start a debate off ......... lol.
Click to expand...

I know where you're coming from Paul, but whatever IS actually costs doesn't seem to amount to much. You get on the cheapest kit zooms.

The 70-200L Canons available with and without IS, are completely different lenses. Different optics (better), weather sealing, circular aperture etc - that's where most of the extra cost goes, as well as IS.
 
HoppyUK said:
That may or may not make a difference in practise but the contrary view, that IS slows down AF, has no basis in theory or practise that I'm aware of.
.
Click to expand...

I think this is one of them "I give up" days :(

Think fast moving sports.. think turn the 400mm lens towards some action and you want to lock on focus as quickly as possible before the action stops..

1) With IS you wait for the IS to kick in before it Auto Focuses and can miss the shot.. its slowed the process down..Its a very quick wait and unless you need that micro second then you wont notice.. but it does slow the whole process of point , auto focus then shoot..

2) Without IS it locks on and you get the shot..

You can twist it turn it or do what you want wiht it... the truth is that I can AF faster without IS

once IS is working then yes it may not slow anything down and it may even improve AF ..But the fact still remains that when IS kicks in it takes a small amount of time which slows down the AF .. OR??? slows down the time before AF will start? Thus still effecting it.

Either way the statement that it makes no amount of sense to turn it off is wrong.. It makes a lot of sense in certain situations..
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
I think this is one of them "I give up" days :(

Think fast moving sports.. think turn the 400mm lens towards some action and you want to lock on focus as quickly as possible before the action stops..

1) With IS you wait for the IS to kick in before it Auto Focuses and can miss the shot.. its slowed the process down..Its a very quick wait and unless you need that micro second then you wont notice.. but it does slow the whole process of point , auto focus then shoot..

2) Without IS it locks on and you get the shot..

You can twist it turn it or do what you want wiht it... the truth is that I can AF faster without IS

once IS is working then yes it may not slow anything down and it may even improve AF ..But the fact still remains that when IS kicks in it takes a small amount of time which slows down the AF .. OR??? slows down the time before AF will start? Thus still effecting it.

Either way the statement that it makes no amount of sense to turn it off is wrong.. It makes a lot of sense in certain situations..
Click to expand...

I wondered if that's what you meant, and of course you're right. But that's a technique issue - you've got to keep the IS continuously booted and up and running properly, and yes that surely wastes a critical fraction of a second if you don't. Seems like a different argument though.
 
I was just about to post F2.8 non IS for sport, but it seems you've already made your mind up.
 
Paul Male said:
Some great info, I think my mind is made up to an F2.8 non IS.
Click to expand...

Good choice. If Nikon offered the choice, I'd have chosen just that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top