Which lens for amateur cricket?

pauljs

pauljs

Messages
390
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Yes it's one of those type of threads.

I currently use a Sigma 120-400mm and Canon 70-200mm f4 L on Canon crop bodies, and am looking to upgrade the Sigma. The reach of the Sigma is fine but I don't think it's great when I have to push the ISO.

I'm considering one of the following (all pre-owned not new, with a budget of £700):

1. Canon 300mm f4 + 1.4 Extender
2. Canon 400mm f5.6
3. Canon 100-400mm

The majority of matches I cover for my club are at home naturally, and the ground has short straight boundaries, where I position myself mostly. Away grounds of course vary greatly. At the moment I'm favouring option 1, which would give me focal lengths of 480 and 672mm (if my maths is correct).

Any and all thoughts welcome.
 
Last edited:
I think i would favour either options 2 or 3. 2 gives you a nice light lens but no stabilisation and 3 are you looking at the mk1 or mk2 version i like the mk2 to be honest
 
Why would the iso effect the performance of the lens. Is it not the sensor that is effected by higher iso.
 
Thanks for the quick replies:
wave01 said:
I think i would favour either options 2 or 3. 2 gives you a nice light lens but no stabilisation and 3 are you looking at the mk1 or mk2 version i like the mk2 to be honest
Click to expand...

Haven't looked as far as MK1 or Mk2 yet, but I'm on a budget of around £700 max.

vetonbike said:
Why would the iso effect the performance of the lens. Is it not the sensor that is effected by higher iso.
Click to expand...

Quite so, but with noise, I think I want a better IQ lens to start with. They just don't seem that sharp with higher ISO.

BillN_33 said:
a "wide"
Click to expand...

Like it :), I'm well covered with a 10-20mm and 17-55mm for wide deliveries.
 
You wont need image stabilisation on a lens for cricket as you will be aiming for a high enough shutter speed to negate the IS, the 400mm f/5.6 prime would be my choice
 
I am in the same quandary for cricket shooting in the summer.

I am leaning towards the EF 100-400, having had a Mk1 on loan back in the summer. I used it sparingly as I was struggling with holding the lens and gripped 70D, due to a health problen so the use of a switch remote release and 'live' view on a tripod was a limiting factor.

At this moment that lens on a 70D was mainly used at about 300mm (x1.6). I had thought of the 300 prime but, my feeling is the zoom would be more useful for sailing events and I am hoping to drrift back to an old favourite - motorsport.

Will folloe this thread and see how it develops. I am determined that 2016 will be a busy time with my photo gear.
 
I went for the 300mm and 1.4x converter to get to 400mm for football and motorsport and I am happy. Would love 400mf2.8 though. The option of 300f4 is nice and the IS can be useful. I had the 100-400mk1 for a short while but sold it as was never that happy with results compared with the 70-300L I had at the time. Only tried the 400f5.6 once and it was super sharp but lack of IS put me off.

It might be too much but I have used my 70-200f2.8ii with a 2x converter with very good results for football/motorsport. Still quick enough to focus and as you are used to that zoom range it might be a consideration.
 
Thanks for all your comments and suggestions, much appreciated.

I went to a dealership who let me try all three options (all used lenses). All the end results were all good.

The 400mm f5.6 gave great results, but there are times when I will want to shoot handheld, so rejected this as it lacks IS, also the 300mm/extender will give me two focal lengths to choose from. Also for our home ground 400mm can be a little close for some shots, i.e. batsman following through on a shot, with the bat vertical above his head
The 100-400mm zoom, gave excellent results again, but I felt the ability to have an extra stop at 300mm would be most valuable. Also, it just felt more comfortable to handhold on the 7D.

I'm sure for my cricket needs all 3 options have their merits, with the 400mm being the least flexible for my requirements. I decided to go for the 300mm f4 & 1.4 Extender which unfortunately did mean I went over my budget, just! Now roll on the start of the outdoor season.
 
Last edited:
Had a call last evening from a mate who got a Tamron 16-300 VR hyperzoom off his partner for Xmas. He thinks it will be great for his bird photography. He thought it might be something I miht like to try for cricket and if so he is happy for me to try it out on my kir.

I know both he and I are now getting on a bit so a few spanners short in the toolbox, but he has only left me six months to find a Nikon to Canon lens mount adapter ;-)
 
Last edited:
Depending on where you are intending to shoot cricket, I wonder whether you really need a 1.4x converter? I have a Canon 300mm f/4 from MPB for less than £700. On a 1.6x crop that's about 400mm. Haven't tried it on cricket yet, but I can't see why it wouldn't be reasonable on local games? Try it before you spend more bucks.
 
the best option for you if you have money/budget here is SIGMA 120-300mm F/2.8, i have Canon 300mm f2.8 IS mk1 and i still dream about this Sigma lens, it has many pros than cons, but i think only its price will hold you back and you will keep looking at many other alternatives.
 
Thanks for the further comments, the interest is appreciated.

Please note that (as stated earlier) "I decided to go for the 300mm f4 & 1.4 Extender which unfortunately did mean I went over my budget, just! Now roll on the start of the outdoor season.". So I have already made my selection.

Gary Coyle said:
Like i said before, you will never use IS for Cricket even hand holding as you will be aiming to use a fast shutter speed
Click to expand...

An excellent point Gary, however, I will use the lens for other photography, want to try wildlife for example, and as such would value the addition of IS.

Photodiva said:
Depending on where you are intending to shoot cricket, I wonder whether you really need a 1.4x converter? I have a Canon 300mm f/4 from MPB for less than £700. On a 1.6x crop that's about 400mm. Haven't tried it on cricket yet, but I can't see why it wouldn't be reasonable on local games? Try it before you spend more bucks.
Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from Carol, but I have been shooting cricket for a few years locally, and 300mm is not long enough to get up close on all grounds, hence I need the 1.4 extender at these locations.

Tugster said:
What body are you using ?
Click to expand...

I have a 7D at the moment Tugster, which hopefully will magically be joined by a 7D MkII soon.
 
I would advise a remotely-triggered Go-Pro strapped to the bowler's arm, the batsman's wrist, or the umpire's groin area. It could actually get exciting.
 
Been thinking about this now that our club is in winter nets. Was thinking about an EF 100-400 so it could be used for a wider range of subjects (offshore sailing, motorsports etc). There's a couple of Mk 1s in the classified.... tempting.
 
I know it's been a while, but due to an op and recovery issues, I got a bit sidetracked :)

Here are some shots taken with the Canon 300mm f4 on a 7D MkII. Shots 1, 2 and 9 included a 1.4 MkII Extender

1 & 2 were shot at the Rose Bowl (Hants v Cardiff MCCU)

The rest were matches my club was involved in, mostly in conditions that were very cold and poorish light. (pretty normal cricket weather then!). My style, if it can be called that is of the "sportrait" type. Clubmembers and opposition seem to like it.

1.



2.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-2.13597/]

3.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-3.13598/]


4.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-4.13599/]


5.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-5.13600/]


6.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-6.13601/]


7.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-7.13602/]


8.
[URL=https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/gallery/photos/7dmkii-300f4-8.13603/][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
 
Paul

Thanks for posting your shots. Still a tough time at the start of the cricket season, the light is still flat. YOou have got some nice moments in the posted imagrs.

My eldest son will be shooting for his club as he cannot plsy due to a hernia operation. He will be using an EF 100-400 Mk 1 on a borrowed 5D mk2.

I will not be shooting cricket this season as I am heading off to Ireland for at least 6 months and most of summer I will be in the South, South West and West of the country. Not exactly 'cricket central' in the republic.

Hope you will post some more!
 
I have found a huge leap in quality with the change to my system (yes, I know it's obvious :) ) But having a 7d Mkii gives enormous benefit due to it's 10fps, fast autofocusing, and being a crop sensor still has the extra reach I require. The 300mm sometimes together with the 1.4 extender is excellent. I'm sure a faster lens would be great, but I'm not sure I could cope with the extra weight even with a monopod at the moment (the f2.8 is about twice the weight of the f4 I believe) . Maybe it would be nice to try though.
 
The thread heading was quote " Which lens for amateur cricket?" unquote

I would have thought a cricket bat would have been more useful :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top