Which lens out of these for Motorsport ?

Colin Port Images

Colin Port Images

Messages
502
Name
Colin
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking at lenses for Motorsport, mainly Canon 70-200mm L,either f4 or f2.8, thinking these may be a bit short, maybe the100-400mm. I am not far from Oulton Park also Aintree for club racing, will probably go to Donington for superbikes, and Silverstone and Misano for Moto-GP. Loads of people have probably been in my position and when spending up to £1000 on a used lens want to get it right. Any help would
be appreciated, thanks Col
 
If your going to Donnington, silverstone a 100-400 is your best bet as a 70-200 would be a tad on the short side. As i said in your previous post i use a 70-200 and since upgrading from my 55-250 the difference has been incredible in terms of sharpness and colours. Which ever lens you choose you wont be dissapointed as they are all good lenses.
Taken today on the beach

IMG_2470 by BtccPics1992, on Flickr

IMG-1787.jpg


Assorted bunch cars and bikes, all taken on the 70-200 accept 1,2,8,11 and 12.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=389651
 
Personally a 70-200mm lens doesn't give you enough reach, but it depends if your accrediated or not. If your shooting inside the fences then perhaps this may work, but if like me your on the outside, then forget it, especially at Donnington and Silverstone. TCs extra range?, Yes the 70-200mm works ok with the 1.4x TC, but 2x performance is soft and you kill you autofocus speed and it would be prone to hunting, plus still not enough reach to autofocus beyond the safety fences with out ghosting.

Lenses I would recommend are

Sigma 100-300mm f4, canon 300mm f4, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 but it depends on your budget.

I use the 300mm f4 and f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8 and 24-105mm f4 plus TCs

Another suggestion is to look for a 2nd hand lens, you get more lens for you money, would probably avoid eBay, as you don't know the history of the lens, check out the sale forums or places like ffordes, mifsuds, camtech, mpb photography or digital depot. I've bought from them and have had no problems with used equipment.
 
70-200 is nothing like long enough unfortunatly.
the f2.8 version works nicely with 1.4x and 2x TC though, and thats my weapon of choice. its very handy to use it as a 140-400mm f4 some of the time, and then 70-200 f2.8 for more close up stuff like driver shots.

100-400 is OK, but just a bit slow.. and IMHO the IS isnt much use for motorsport so I'd rather not spend the money on an extra that's not needed.
you can put a 1.4TC on the 100-400 but it makes it very slow, and you only get AF on the centre point (depending on camera)
 
Thanks for your comments, basically all the lenses I mentioned are between £500 & £1000 depending on is versions. I keep changing my mind all the time though ! I like the idea of using the 70-200 mm as an all round lens too but would have to fork out on an extender. I like to take photos at amateur football too so the lens would have to cover this too. Like I said I will only be buying one lens and want to make sure I get it right !
 
Gary said:
its very handy to use it as a 140-400mm f4
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be a 98-280mm f/4 or a 140-400mm f/5.6 which makes it slightly slower at the wide end than a 100-400mm?
Though the convenience of carrying and cost of buying one lens and a TC certainly sounds better than having to have two lenses.
 
I use a 70-200 f2.8 non is with a 2x converter on an eos 7d giving a effective range of 224-640mm at f4 not bad but just a bit slow to auto focus.
This photo was taken at Brands using this combo

BSB_Brands_Oct_2011_7d_609_edited.jpg
 
Nothing wrong with that photo mate. I have used an old Canon100-300mm USM for my 1st year & done ok but want something better. The 70-200 2.8 non is goes for reasonable prices used, so if I went down that road would I just use a monopod with it ? I Am using a 550D by the way so not sure if the auto focus will be good enough anyway !
 
The Canon 70-300 L is possibly worth considering especially as it has a 4 stop IS system rather than a 1 stop system.

Personally I use a 300mm f/4 L prime mostly, but have a Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX. The Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 is highly regarded by many and will take a teleconverter well.
 
I was also going to suggest the 300/400 primes. I'm going to assume you are mainly shooting bikes from the events you mentioned, so 200mm would be a bit short, I certainly found it short at Silverstone/Donington.

I've heard good things about the 70-300L, but not tried it myself.
 
If you want to shoot football as well then I would strongly recommend the Sigma 120-300 f2.8. It ain't cheap but is utterly fantastic for shooting football which for most of the season you will be shooting in poor and fading light conditions and at the track it is great for shooting through fences.
 
I don't find the 100-400 slow, it does however have obvious aperture disadvantages over the f2.8 70-200, being f5.6 at 400mm. However generally it's my lens of choice for the big motorsport tracks as generally you're kept a way back from the track. These days with modern bodies I don't find pushing the ISO up too much of an issue.

I also have the 70-200 f2.8 IS, a great lens for isolating subjects with depth of field and great in low light/end of the day/bad weather. Somewhere you can get close to the track, such as hill climb is great for this lens. I do have a 1.4 and 2x convertor and have before just taken these and this lens, but I still prefer the 100-400 over using the 70-200 with TC's.

So the obvious answer is - it depends on where you are shooting from.
Don't discount the second hand marketplace. I picked up two 100-400's at £600 and £850 for a three month old one. My 70-200 was also secondhand, a bargain at £750 and the chap had used it for 30 mins before deciding it was too short and wanted a 100-400.
 
70-200 alone as other people said is way to short, unless you interested in doing just panning, I'll suggest it if you can get a tc with it, otherwise ill go for the 100-400...

I'm using the 70-200 2.8 IS with the tc x2 for a few years now and I'm quite happy with most of the things I shoot:)
 
Lens maximum aperture is not just about the aperture that you take the shot with, its about the amount of light it lets in to allow the AF to do its job.

AF works like this... max aperture, wide open, light on AF sensors... shutter release button pressed, aperture stops down to whatever you (or the camera) have set for the exposure of the shot.

Bigger aperture, more light hitting the AF sensors. Its like trying to read a newspaper with a candle vs trying to read it under a halogen spot lamp.

You'll get more consistant results from a f2.8 lens than a f5.6 one even assuming the focus motor is the same on both. The amount of light f5.6 lets in is ONE QUARTER of f2.8:

Aperture_diagram.svg


And thats before you start talking about IQ (y)
 
you could use a 1.4x TC and its sort of OK, but at 2x it won't be as good as a 100-400, simply because its never as good to use a 2x compared to a lens thats actually that focal length.
 
I suppose "bad" is relative.... its obviously not going to look like this:

tumblr_ly0qquO1oP1qav3uso1_1280.png


:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top