Best lens for indoor sports photography?

I have a K100D Super and am looking for a lens to shoot high school and college wrestling. Fast action,

gymnasium lighting... typically shot from bleachers. A couple lenses I've considered are...

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens for Pentax,

Pentax USA Zoom Normal-Telephoto SMCP-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 ED (IF) SDM Autofocus, and

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens for Pentax AF

 

Would appreciate any help/advice as these are not inexpensive commitments.

Thanks,

Pam

Pam, with the K100D super you have the luxury of shooting at 1600 ISO with very good results, so I would buy the 70-200 Tamron F/2.8 to fill as much of the frame as possible. I had the Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 but I sent it back because it was to soft at F/2.8...i have been shooting some of my kids basketball games and been using the Sigma 100-300 F/4.0 with very good results in large part due to the way Pentax handles noise...

I'd opt for the 50-135...

 

Wait, you said bleechers...well then longer is better.

 

From the floor, for any major court sport, you can use as little as a 85mm to get frame filling shots.

 

Of course from the bleechers you can get some great shots with a 300-400mm lens. Eventually I'd like a 300mm 2.8 for bleecher stuff. The 300mm F/4 is barely adequate indoors in good lighting at ISO 1600 but the flipside is you can fill the frame with it!!

 

I've never shot wrestling but I have shot gymnastics and they are similar in gym lighting and speed of action (well gymnastics is probably faster overall). Although both allow you to prefocus on a spot, like gymnastics you can focus on the landing spot, or a spot on the balance beam. Wrestlers are pretty static in terms of confinement to a small area and the fact they are often locked up, and so you don't need a fast focusing lens.

 

Anyway, if you can get on the mats your requirements change a lot, plus eye level shots are more engaging to the viewer.

 

Something like a fast 50mm or 80mm range would be great from the mats. For that I'd definitely recommend the 50-135mm.

 

I have both the 50-135mm and the 70-200 2.8 and both are great lenses. Is the Sigma infact HSM now for Pentax? If it is it will probably be a bit faster than the 50-135mm focusing. The reason is Sigma didn't make it's HSM for Pentax backwards compatible with non SDM bodies (not a big deal). But like I noted, for wrestling focus speed is probably irrelevant!!

 

Like Javier said, fill the frame, at high ISO you won't have a lot of quality pixels to crop off. I always like to frame with the idea of it's going to be an 8x10 so just center frame it, (AF.C single point center) and crop to 8x10 later. Dead space in sports shots is pointless since there really isn't anything to lead the eye to in most cases.

Pam, I have shot tons of HS and college wrestling over the past 4 years, and preparing to do more.

 

The Pentax DA* 50-135mm is a great lens- for a lot of uses. And excellent for medium-long distance with ability to zoom back to a shorter tele range. But I have rarely used such fast zooms for this purpose, because using flash is best. For one thing, a lens of f/2.8 might give good enough shutter speed without flash in the brighter venues, but even here, the lighting is downwards with little reflection off the mat, creating shadows under the figures. So shooting at f/4 or so is fine, as long as the lens performs well there. But if you need that FL, that is a wonderful quality lens for many uses.

 

First and formost, invest in a good flash unit, you will need it. Like the Pentax AF 540 FGZ, available for about $320 or the somewhat more costly Metz AF 58-1 for about $400 dedicated for Pentax. These are excellent for other uses as well. Both have swivel and tilt heads for bounce flash (though you'll not be using that for wrestling matches. The Metz has a 2nd built-in flash for bounce-and-fill.) But I do not know if the Metz has the high-speed capability above the standard 1/180 sec maximum shutter speed sync as the Pentax unit does. However, with wrestling I have found for typical lighting used, 1/125 sec is about right. I usually shoot in shutter priority mode (Tv). Using ISO 800 is fine for most lighting. Even 400 ISO will often do.

 

Another matter of importance is the purpose of your shoot. Is this for the athletes and coaches? Or the possible publishing in a local or school paper? That may have a bearing on shooting style. Publishers often like the two wrestlers pretty well isolated in a closeup type shot. In some arenas you will have to shoot from the bleachers, but that is not always the best position to get the best shots. Frequently, you may be able to get closer, down in front. Then you can use a shorter zoom. Perhaps a 17-70mm, or a 28-75mm, or even a nice 28-105mm would be fine. I find I seldom need a wide angle view, just semi-wide or longer will do. Then you can get an angle closer to the level of the athletes. You may often have to move about for a good shot. But do be careful under these conditions. There are people coming across your path from all directions, and all kinds of things under foot to trip on.

 

If the mat is of darker color, it is a good idea to back down your flash output by about - 2/3 to - 1.5 EV, especially if the athletes are of light skin.

 

I shoot for the athletes and coaches. Therefore, I often like to include some background in the shots, like the coaches, team mates and even the crowd in some cases. Gives the events some context for a more memorable keepsake. It is a challenge, indeed. I try to get a shot of the hand raised at the match's end if our guy has won. That said, my shots have been used for a commemorative poster, and found their way into the school yearbook, to my delight.

 

I usually shoot film for wrestling to provide lots of prints for the team. I have many more action shots than this, but sorry I have only this one scanned in to offer as an example. Trusty Pentax PZ-1p camera, and very nice little Pentax 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5 lens- (still available at Adorama, I think).

 

Wrestling season is about to begin. Have fun!<div></div>

Thanks... I'd say I'm about 50/50 on getting mat side. Depends on the venue. I typically don't use a flash because it is distracting and I like to shoot continuous because the action can be pretty quick during the bursts of action. I realized I've had a teleconverter on and that may have been some of my problem... so I'm taking it off... I appreciate all advice as I am very much an novice but love to shoot for the wrestlers and their parents. I have had some show up on team web sites and that's always nice too. Just want to continue to improve so I appreciate any/all suggestions.

Pam<div></div>

Pam,

 

I'm not disagreeing with Michael but directly flash is a No No imo for wrestling, and for stuff like gymnastics it's almost always banned. Actually for most indoor sports it[s banned, or frowned upon. I used to use direct flash on my sisters backetball games and no one complained. But if I was shooting that stuff again, I'd wirelessly strobe well away from the camera, and out of the eyeline.

 

Almost all pro indoor sports are strobed at the big events. Those SI guys don't stop sweat in mid air with fast lenses, but rather at low ISO, mid aperture, and high shutter speed.

 

You can in most cases with he permission of the coaches use a off camera strobe system. Usually telling them you would be happy to turn over a CD/DVD of images in appreciation is a nice touch.

 

2 Vivitar 285s and a coupe of wireless transmitters will make your "slow" f/4-5.6 lenses perfect. I'm not shooting hockey this year, but next year I am hoping to be able to light a pro arena with enough fill light around the net to shoot a f/5.6 and ISO 800 and stop the action with a 1/500 shutter speed.

 

Wireless strobing will NOT distract the wrestlers because it's not eye level. You'd put your strobes high up in the bleachers on stands and then fire acrossthe gym. The short duration strobes won't be noticed but will either provide enough main light or enough fill light make a big difference.

 

This setup really isn't that complicated.

 

My plan with hockey is to put the strobes on the railings on the upper deck. potentially 4 285HVs 2 would be fired down at the net and 2 off to the sides going cross ice between the blueline and goal pointed down at the goal. I know I cannot light a pro arena with this setup, but I can provide enoug fill light to fill in shadows with the use of better beamers. If I shoot wide open and at 1600 I can probably cut power to 1/2 power thus getting 2 shots per charge cycle.

 

Anyway, if you are serious about this, you will definitely look into a wireless RF (not optical) setup.

 

I figure for about $400-500 you can build a high end kit. and if the gym is small enough, you can set the power ratio of flash to 1/4 or 1/8 giving you "burst capability" of 4 or more shots per charge cycle.

 

Finally, the problem with fast glass is to make the most of it you have to use it wide open. And while f/1.2 50mm's sound appealing, the DOF you have is so small that you get out of focus images anyway. I generally aim for f/3.5 to 5.6 when shooting because I know my DOF will be deep enough to keep my whole subject in focus!!

Thanks Justin for the great advice. As I said I'm a novice and not sure I can get into placing stobe flash at different places in the gym... that's a bit above my expertise. I do think I will get the Vivitar 285 flash (probably 2 as you suggest) however. I currently have 2... one is a simple Sunpak I used with my film 35mm and the other is a Sigma EF-530 DG Super... which is a bit more complicated than I'm up for at this point. I appreciate all the help and advice...

There are only a couple of venues out of many I attended where the lighting was bright enough that using flash was optional if I used my fast 28-70mm lens wide open at f/2.8 to provide the needed shutter speed of 1/125 sec. at ISO 800. I took some meter readings before starting to determine this. I have on occasion shot at 1/90 sec, only if trying to show more motion during certain action. Good idea, removing your TC, because it makes your lens that much slower, and you get less shutter speed. That is a nice shot, but it looks like your shutter speed is a bit low, hence the slightly soft edges. So without flash, the f/2.8 lens is virtually a necessity, in my experience. At other, less-bright venues, at LEAST f/4 at ISO 1600 would be necessary without flash.

 

Maybe my reflexes are quick, but coming from film, I find with wrestling just keeping my attention on the action and picking my shots in single shot mode has produced a very high success rate. At least 90% keepers. I often do move around for angles because they are constantly moving around. But of course staying stationary can be done too and just wait for a good angle. I try to get both faces in the shot, or at least our guy's face, as you did in your shot. I have other shots with coaches in the background yelling instructions, and even some others with team mates yelling and gesturing too. Sometimes having the ref close in at a dramatic time adds to the intensity. It is a lot of fun. And what you are giving those athletes are their memories for the future. I am sure it is appreciated. I also found the coaches like analyzing the shots for wrestling technique.

 

Flash use is common around here at wrestling matches, even by those doing press coverage. Mostly, the wrestlers are so concentrating on their opponent, it is not something they take notice of. But sometimes, after the match has been won, one of them will come over and ask- "Hey, did you get some good shots?" If you do not need continuous burst shooting, flash is an option and you get more aperture choices. F/4 provides a bit more depth of field of what will be sharp in your shot. My shot above was made with the lens wide open, as this lens performs well there, and that means f/4 at this FL. You can see the people in the background are not sharp, but fully recognizable. This is perfect, because you want those people to look just ok, but the wrestlers to look sharper to stand out from the background. At f/2.8, the background people here would be blurrier. So, even with a f/2.8 lens, I may well opt for shooting in (M) Manual mode to select my shutter speed, and aperure of f/4, with flash.

 

I was not trying to over promote getting the DA* 50-135mm, just that it is indeed an outstanding lens- if that is the focal length you need. If you are not real far back it should serve very well, indeed. The Sigma 70-300mm DG APO is a good lens, but will not get you better than f/4.5 out to about 180mm, then f/5.6 is wide open. With flash, that is ok. A powerful flash will get you a range of say 60 or 70 ft at f/5.6 and ISO 800, and farther at f/4 under such cricumstances. The more compact, well-designed Pentax 55-300mm f/3.5-5.8 would also be a good choice for more range. What lens have you been using as in your shot above? Its range looks adequate from your shooting position, but a 28-??mm lens may allow your position to be a little less close. How often do you need wide angle?

 

If you look at the exif, by opening the shots in your Pentax software, you can see shot by shot what focal length was being used. If you rarely get wider than 28mm, you can also possibly consider getting another lens starting at 28mm and out to somewhat longer reach than what you have now for your shorter range work.

The lens I've been using is a Tamron AF Aspherical SR Di (IF) 28-300mm f3.5-6.3... with the added Tameron-F AF Tele-Converter 1.4X... which is probably part of my problem. Many of my shots have been taken on the auto setting because I have had so much trouble getting a light enough picture on manual from the bleachers. This weekend I will be taking pictures of another college match from the bleachers... without the tele-converter... in manual and we'll see how it goes. I'll try with and without a flash... if I can get close enough that a flash works...

 

The picture I have above is one of the better action shots. I had many that were just too blurry or that the background was clearer... or that their face was blurry while the body clear... some of the issues are the operator! : )

BTW Justin's idea for off-camera strobes is a good idea for some sports, and for some venues, but around here at least, it would not work out. Often there are 5, 6, or even 8 or more mats going all at once. People all over, and moving about. If there is an upper walkway, masses of people are there leaning on everything, eating, talking, and milling around Our team is sometimes occupying different mats at a time with two matches going on at opposite ends, and even in other nearby gyms. And the next match will likely be assigned to a different mat yet, which one has to find out by listening to the announcer, only a few minutes before the start of that match. So I move around a lot.

 

But your area may be different. Where do you shoot?

 

My very first ever tournament was quite a new experience. I went with the same outlook on flash use as Justin's, and did not even take a flash unit. Just my fast 28-70mm lens. Fortunately, it was one of the brightest venues, making flash unnecessary. So bright, I was able to use my built-in flash for fill when I wanted it without the big lens casting a noticeable shadow. When I got to this big school and walked out onto the floor, with such a huge crowd, many teams, officials, and all the mats ready to go, I was looking around for a face to recognize and didn't know where to go next. From a distance, I heard my name yelled, and found I was spotted by the wrestler I knew. He introduced me to everyone, including coaches and team mates. I jockeyed around with them and started shooting some matches, thinking this is fun and quite challenging. Then when my young friend's first match came up, and I was shooting away, I found myself also excitedly cheering him on with the others, and I knew I was hooked!

 

When I saw so many parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents, and friends shooting with flashes all over the place, most from point-and shoots of various sizes, and no one paid the slightest attention, I said, well, I need not have worried about that! Then a photog from the local paper came up, and knelt at mat's edge with his pro style lens and was using a flash unit on camera, with a reflector/diffuser attached. Probably similar in effect to what the 540 and the Metz have built in. Ok for short distance use.

 

I wound up with some quite decent shots, and the team as well as coaches were very pleased to get the prints.

$$$ to donuts you'll need flash at a distance. At close to 28mm, your lens is at f/3.5 and you may be able to get a high enough shutter speed without flash there, setting your ISO at 800 or 1600. At longer focal length, your aperture gets slower. f/6.3 is quite slow. Between 28-100mm you will probably be at f/3.5-4.5 wide open. Pretty decent. You don't want to go more than 1600 max. I do not know your Sigma flash- but it needs to be P-TTL compatible, or have its own auto sensor for reliable results. The other flash is doubtful. Investing in a very good flash may be of great value. The 540 also gives you distance readout, according to your ISO and aperture settings.

 

I'd say do not shoot in auto. The only auto program mode that *might* work is the action scene mode. Shoot in Tv mode to control your shutter speed. The camera will then set the aperture for exposure, as the lens' limit has available. Or shoot in manual to control both, but again to the lens' limit. With a good flash, you are not as limited, can then select more in the way of aperture and the flash will correctly fill in where otherwise your exposure would be too dim.

 

Set your camera's auto focus to center only, spot. On the K100 the odd abbreviation in the menu for that is something like Swch dst msr pt.

I waould even advise against using that old flash as it may be completely incompatible and coud even cause damage.

For the middle and high school matches I shoot I typically can get mat side and some are bright enough that flash isn't needed. For the college matches... it depends... last year I was very lucky for most as I talked my way to mat side... but not always. I will take your advice and work with the settings you suggest this weekend. I also will not use the old flash. Sounds like you have lots of experience and understand what I'm dealing with in shooting wrestling matches. Two questions... would you recommend the Vivitar 285 flash and that I get either the Pentax USA Zoom Normal-Telephoto SMCP-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 ED (IF) SDM Autofocus, and Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro AF Lens for Pentax AF to help me get better results? One more question... If the Tamron lens is as good as the Pentax.. I'm thinking having the extra length would be good... but would rather have better quality than length... so would be interested in hearing which you would recommend.

I'm basing all my strobe stuff on my highschool gym, which had just a few mats. I hadn't wrestled since I was about 10 years old, but I watched a few of my friends matches!

 

Just one thing to keep in mind...2 or 4 strobes can light an entire basketball court. Yep 2 285s can light the the area inside a 3 point line on each side of the court.

 

Generally the setup is high on bleachers on light stands or some sort of vice grip facing the foul line. With just 4 strobes you would do this on each side of the court and skip the half court area (most action isn't their anyway).

 

Anyway, my point isn't about basketball, but I'm assuming these gyms are not bigger than a full size basketball court? Are they? I don't know?

 

If not, 2 strobes could work fine, and if not two than 4 strobes.

 

You'd need an Elinchron or Pocket Wizard transmitter, and a 4 285s. Total cost about $800 for the lower priced option, the PWs cost more so maybe $1400 (assuming you buy everything brand new, I'd buy the 285s used and look for used wizards, or just buy new Elinchron Skyports). But this will make you look like a pro with even a slow lens!

 

If you can get mat side, the 50-135mm is a better choice...or a 28-70 and 70-200 F/2.8 combo.

 

I had the Tamron for a few days in Nikon mount, I can't comment other than it didn't focus well. I believe this hasn't been an issue with Pentax, but the 50-135mm is about as good as a zoom gets IMO. I doubt the Tamron is better!!!

For mat side a 50-135mm will generally be too long. You will likely need some wide or semi wide angle, as athletes may suddenly move up close to your area. A moderate zoom like 24-90mm, or even 28-70mm is generally fine for closer work. If 28mm is wide angle enough, Tamron makes a truly fine, fast 28-75mm f/2.8 pro style lens at a reasonable $350 through B&H or Adorama. Then there is the very nice little Pentax 28-105mm f/3.2-4.5, which offers good quality at wide open aperture and good zoom range. No f/2.8, so you'll need flash most of the time, but the nice thing is it is so small, you can quickly use the built-n flash if you are caught off guard without your flash unit on, and with no interference from its size, as long as you have the lens hood off. I have been able to grab many shots by being able to go quickly into action like that with this lens. It is an outgoing lens, but Adorama still lists one in stock at only $210.

 

You have a 28-300mm lens. You are therefore in an excellent position, unlike most others, to accurately test and determine your actual focal length needs. I would recommend when getting mat side, and also in your shots from bleachers, keep track of the zoom focal lengths it takes, as you use your zoom, to frame the shots you want. This will tell you just what you will need in a better lens. The new Pentax 55-300mm zoom tested exceptionally well in the test reviews, for a longer range tele zoom, for indoor use with flash, and is available at about $300. If you don't need to go beyond 135mm, the DA* 50-135mm is a professional type lens of extremely high quality, and its f/2.8 aperture will sometimes, in brighter lighting, allow flashless use, and more out-of-focus background. But that comes at greater expense, especially in a telephoto zoom lens. Your K100D Super is designed to take advantage of its silent focus feature. It is a very nice, very capable camera, very good imaging and a very fine low-light shooter.

 

I also recommend getting just a very good $320 Pentax AF 540 FGZ flash unit first and go from there. I bought that because of its compatibility and automatic dedicated design for current Pentax bodies, and have used it little so far, but favorably impressed by what I have gotten. The photo above is with my older Pentax flash model which is good. In fact, I'd just as soon have regular TTL, but the pull-out bounce diffuser is a good thing for closer work. Just keep your eye on the switches and settings, because when jostling around, not hard to accidently move one where it shouldn't be. When not shooting from far away, I also often manually set the flash's zoom head to wide angle, even when shooting at a longer zoom setting. The coverage is fine, and the auto zoom takes more battery power. The $400 Metz is a fine unit also, with its built-in secondary fill flash, which may be useful for group team shots and the like where there are lower ceilings to use for bounce. This effect can be excellent.

 

The idea of a strobe setup is intriguing, though I have never seen it done at tournaments, even by the pro photogs doing press coverage. The setup/takdown may be too much hassle in the hectic atmosphere of a wrestling tourney. Or maybe, unlike other sports where players are more vertical and floors more predictably reflective, wrestlers down on the floor sometimes on dark mats tend to have brighter upper sides and dark underneath. The only place I have seen it done is at the State Championships, often hosted at the Palace, which is a huge arena. But that is a permanent house setup, and coverage is from all angles.

Upon reflection, I do recall I have on occasion successfully used the built-in flash with my big fast pro Tokina 28-70mm for wrestling, without significant interference shadowing, due to good in-house lighting. The Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 is more compact, and should do well under those conditions with the built-in flash. But do remove the lens hood!

 

Here's a shot I have scanned from that first tournament, taken with my big, fast, Tokina 28-70mm lens, using the built-in flash and Fuji Superia ISO 800 print film. You can barely detect an interference shadow at the bottom, thanks to the school's good lighting. The smaller Tamron lens should fare even better.<div></div>

I just checked the Sigma flash you have. It IS P-TTL compatible, it IS powerful, and should fill the bill for your needs. It should have some kind of distance readout. As far as a diffuser, I believe the pro I saw with one was using a Lumiquest pocket bounce, sort of looks like a bonnet, that attaches around the back of the flash head, so the flash can be tilted upward and bounced off the bonnet. You can control the degree of upward tilt, of course. Good for close work. Not expensive. I found it at B&H under flashes, then under accessories, and bouncers.

Thanks so much for all the great advice and suggestions... I truly appreciate all the help. I dug into my cabinet and

found I have the following lenses and will give a couple of them a try this weekend depending on how close I can

get...

Sigma 28-105mm f3.8-5.6;

Sigma 70-210mm f4-5.6;

Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6;

Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.8;

Pentax 18-55mm f 3.5-5.6;

... plus the one I listed above that has been on my camera for the past 9 or 10 months...

Tamron 28-300mm f3.5-6.3

 

I definately want to get a faster lens... say f2.8 or so...

Thanks again for all the help,

Pam

The Tamron 70-300mm should serve you especially well for distance shooting. At 170-200mm or so, it should still give you f/4.5 wide open. Since you already have that, no need to consider the Sigma 70-300mm. Looks like you have some good tools for exploration! Don't hesitate to keep us updated as to what determinations you have made in a new thread, and perhaps send some results.

I definately will... thanks again for all the help. I have learned more and have received better advice in the last 2 days than I've gotten in the past 12 months!