Sports Lens Recommendations

[mrcowdude20]

Hi Everyone,
I currently shoot high school basketball. I am not doing this or any money, simply because I enjoy shooting and my brother is on the team. Anyway, I am looking to upgrade my lens and camera.

First of all, I am going to upgrade to the 1D Mark II, and that is for sure. Right now, I have a T3. Therefore, I will be using a full-frame camera. I have a Canon 50 1.4, and that is the only lens I can use for indoors. The 50mm just isn't enough. I am able to be under the basket, on the sides, pretty much anywhere. We have large gyms. So - I am looking to upgrade to a 70-200 2.8, or another lens. So my choices are in the poll and if you will please vote on the lens, that would be awesome. The light in the gyms are decent, although no where near being fantastic. No flash is allowed.

Thanks so much for your time!

EDIT - The multiple choice feature is added. If you think I should get two go ahead! Thanks!

 

[Zerozal]

Hmmm...you realize that the 1DII is almost 10 years old, and is NOT full frame, right?

Unless you're getting a really good price on the 1DII, you might be better off with a more modern camera, especially one with better high ISO performance which you will probably need shooting indoor basketball. Maybe something like the last generation 5D? The autofocus performance will probably be good enough on a 5DII, with much better high ISO quality.

Sorry to answer a question that you didn't ask--I voted for the 85mm 1.4.

 

[Prodo123]

1. 1D Mark II is a severe downgrade from a T3 in terms of image quality.

2. All of those lenses are only subpar for sports, especially the Sigma 1.4 (autofocus is painfully slow), Sigma/Tamron 70-200 (blurry, especially visible on crop cameras, with slow autofocus), and Tamron 28-75 (slow autofocus). The only viable option for fast-action sports lens would be the Sigma 24-70, but only for indoor sports as it would not be long enough for outdoor sports games.

3. I'd recommend getting a used 60D instead and save up for a genuine Canon 70-200. With sports, you cannot compromise on quality, especially with autofocus; notice how I've ruled most of the suggestions out with slow autofocus.

Or just keep the T3 and get a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS; in fact, this would be my personal suggestion..

If you need super-fast burst to be able to shoot sports, you probably need better timing and anticipation. I shoot sports with a T2i and Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM, with its measly 9 AF points and 3.7 FPS, with absolutely no issues. Burst is more necessary for people whose lives depend on the work, for example the photographers you see in the Super Bowl with behemoth lenses on monopods. Otherwise it's just learning your camera and how it behaves.

 

[kevinfulton.ca]

Here ya go. This is a great site and should definitely help you.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Indoor-Sports-Lens.aspx

Of these ones though I'd recommend the Canon 85 1.8. Optically the Sigma is a bit better, but it's AF is known to be a tad sluggish and inconsistent. That being said, that was on early copies, so that may have been improved or resolved. I just know that the AF on my Canon is ridiculously quick and accurate.

 

[kevinfulton.ca]

1. 1D Mark II is a severe downgrade from a T3 in terms of image quality.

2. All of those lenses are only subpar for sports, especially the Sigma 1.4 (autofocus is painfully slow), Sigma/Tamron 70-200 (blurry, especially visible on crop cameras, with slow autofocus), and Tamron 28-75 (slow autofocus). The only viable option for fast-action sports lens would be the Sigma 24-70, but only for indoor sports as it would not be long enough for outdoor sports games.

3. I'd recommend getting a used 60D instead and save up for a genuine Canon 70-200. With sports, you cannot compromise on quality, especially with autofocus; notice how I've ruled most of the suggestions out with slow autofocus.

Or just keep the T3 and get a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS; in fact, this would be my personal suggestion..

If you need super-fast burst to be able to shoot sports, you probably need better timing and anticipation. I shoot sports with a T2i and Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM, with its measly 9 AF points and 3.7 FPS, with absolutely no issues. Burst is more necessary for people whose lives depend on the work, for example the photographers you see in the Super Bowl with behemoth lenses on monopods. Otherwise it's just learning your camera and how it behaves.

Totally agree with this. Though, I have heard that the newer VR version of the Tamron is a big improvement and is pretty darn close to the Canon version. From what I've read it's IQ is better then Canon's non-IS, but not quite as good as their top end IS. Could be something to look at. Not sure about the AF though.

 

[Prodo123]

Totally agree with this. Though, I have heard that the newer VR version of the Tamron is a big improvement and is pretty darn close to the Canon version. From what I've read it's IQ is better then Canon's non-IS, but not quite as good as their top end IS. Could be something to look at. Not sure about the AF though.

To be honest I would pick the better autofocus over better image quality for sports. With telephotos you are pretty much guaranteed at least an acceptable level of image quality, due to the ease of designing an excellent telephoto lens. Plus, all that extra-sharp goodness in a lens goes to waste if it can't focus right!

I obviously did not recommend the new Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 because the OP is looking for a budget solution. If I had a dream lens for sports, though, that would be the one.

 

[AirborneAngel]

Body-wise get a 50D/7D - significant upgrade over a T3 or 1DMk2.

Lens-wise get a 24-70 2.8 or a 70-200 2.8, you won't regret it.

 

[mrcowdude20]

1. 1D Mark II is a severe downgrade from a T3 in terms of image quality.

2. All of those lenses are only subpar for sports, especially the Sigma 1.4 (autofocus is painfully slow), Sigma/Tamron 70-200 (blurry, especially visible on crop cameras, with slow autofocus), and Tamron 28-75 (slow autofocus). The only viable option for fast-action sports lens would be the Sigma 24-70, but only for indoor sports as it would not be long enough for outdoor sports games.

3. I'd recommend getting a used 60D instead and save up for a genuine Canon 70-200. With sports, you cannot compromise on quality, especially with autofocus; notice how I've ruled most of the suggestions out with slow autofocus.

Or just keep the T3 and get a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS; in fact, this would be my personal suggestion..

If you need super-fast burst to be able to shoot sports, you probably need better timing and anticipation. I shoot sports with a T2i and Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM, with its measly 9 AF points and 3.7 FPS, with absolutely no issues. Burst is more necessary for people whose lives depend on the work, for example the photographers you see in the Super Bowl with behemoth lenses on monopods. Otherwise it's just learning your camera and how it behaves.

Ok, thanks for this! Would the 7D or 6D or 60D be best? I heard the 6D is the better one, but the 7D has a lot faster FPS. I would love to save up for the Canon, but I am only 14 years old, and do not have a job. So the Canon option is most likely not going to work.

 

[Prodo123]

Ok, thanks for this! Would the 7D or 6D or 60D be best? I heard the 6D is the better one, but the 7D has a lot faster FPS. I would love to save up for the Canon, but I am only 14 years old, and do not have a job. So the Canon option is most likely not going to work.

The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS costs around $1200 on eBay used.
I'd just stick with the T3 and practice knowing which AF point to use in which situation, and when to press the shutter for the best shots. But if you insist, the 60D is a fine choice.
But remember, there's a reason why people choose glass over body.

 

[admwright]

I heard the 6D is the better one, but the 7D has a lot faster FPS.

High FPS is not always what you want. Thom Hogan had a recent blog post about this (http://www.bythom.com/photographic-...workshop-blog/bonus-day--of-antelope-and.html - see the last section) and though it is about wildlife, it applies equally well to sport. Some quotes:

"At 1/1000 of a second shutter speed, 8 fps means you missed 992/1000ths of the second. How likely is it the perfect wing position was in that rather than the 8/1000ths you captured?"

"By "blackout" that means that no view of the framing area can be seen and the focus system isn't getting information. So let's add things up. 8 fps x 75ms = 3/5ths of a second. That's right, for 3/5ths of a second the focus system isn't getting information and you're not seeing anything." (the 75ms is for top line pro cameras, lower spec cameras will have longer blackout)

You are much better to use focus tracking to follow the player and then press the shutter to capture the specific moment of action you want.

 

[mrcowdude20]

The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non-IS costs around $1200 on eBay used.
I'd just stick with the T3 and practice knowing which AF point to use in which situation, and when to press the shutter for the best shots. But if you insist, the 60D is a fine choice.
But remember, there's a reason why people choose glass over body.

I agree with this, however, my mom wants to start photograohy, so I'm giving her the T3, and going to upgrade. So I will definently be getting a new body. I'll look around for the 70-200 from Canon. Thanks!

 

[cocky jeremy]

I see everything from 24 to 200mm. My first question is.. what sport? lol. I wouldn't recommend 200 for basketball (near court, anyway) and I wouldn't recommend 24 for football. So.. what are you shooting?

 

[Prodo123]

I see everything from 24 to 200mm. My first question is.. what sport? lol. I wouldn't recommend 200 for basketball (near court, anyway) and I wouldn't recommend 24 for football. So.. what are you shooting?

I often find the 70-200 range perfect for basketball. Cross-court shots (hehe), tight framing, and good bokeh tends to emphasize the action a lot more than the standard range.

 

[cocky jeremy]

I often find the 70-200 range perfect for basketball. Cross-court shots (hehe), tight framing, and good bokeh tends to emphasize the action a lot more than the standard range.

I know what you mean. That's why I just said 200 as an example. Overall, the full 70-200 range is perfect for basketball. I just couldn't think up a good example to get my point across, so I used 24 and 200. lol.

 

[sportst]

Sports Lens Recommendations

I want to know some recommendations of sports,please help me.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

I want to know some recommendations of sports,please help me.

• Chess Boxing
• Underwater Rugby
• Rock Paper Scissors League
• Bog Snorkelling
• Cheese Chasing
• Buzkashi

That should help

 

[ocabj]

The 7D will be better than a 6D for fast paced sports. Only problem is the focal range if you try to use a 70-200 for basketball. It's going to be fine for pretty much everything beyond the key (from the baseline). Under the basket and within the key is going to be too close for a 70mm on APS-C. Maybe run two bodies with something like an 18-55 or a 24 or 35 prime (on APS-C) for under the basket.

 

[Apple fanboy]

• Chess Boxing
• Underwater Rugby
• Rock Paper Scissors Lizard SpockLeague
• Bog Snorkelling
• Cheese Chasing
• Buzkashi

That should help

Fixed that for you

To the OP, as you are only at school (and shooting school sports) don't they have any equipment you could borrow? I have no experience of shooting sports, but like just about every bit of advice I ever read, was glass over bodies when on a budget. Read up on preview.com lens section where you can compare lenses. etc.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

Fixed that for you

Good lord, where was my mind?

 

[Apple fanboy]

Good lord, where was my mind?

BBT is my daughters favourite programme. Seams like its always on in our house!

 

[puckhead193]

From what i've seen most use a 70-200 2.8 on FF cameras. Some then use pocket wizards to remote trigger flashes/lights high up on stands.
This is of course for basketball. Football/lax/baseball etc is completely different.

Also if you don't have a press pass from the local paper/tv you prob won't be able to shoot from the sidelines/behind the net.