Night Sports - what lens to use?

Discussion in 'Sports' started by mikeclark, Oct 12, 2017.

  1. And Tamron just announced a 35-150/2.8-4 :)
    Too bad I bought a Nikon 70-200/4, I would really love a wider short end for when the play gets close to me.
     
  2. In principle, the faster the better.
    Most important is reachability which allows you not to crop much.
    Other hand, depends on your body ISO usability, set auto ISO to max value acceptable in M mode, min. Speed to avoid blurred capture. Then you can play with aperture and speed values according to the site condition.
    Good luck on practice.
     
  3. IMHO, there is no one "perfect" field lens, except for the imaginary 28-300 (DX) f/2.
    When the play comes close, the short end of a 70-200 is too long, and I have to back peddle onto the track, to try to get back enough to get a shot. Or I just miss the close shots.
    But when the play is on the far side of the field, I would need a 400mm on a DX camera (600 on FF).

    It is a compromise.
    You select your lens, and limit yourself to the action in the part of the field that the lens covers.
    Or you shoot with TWO cameras, one for the far side of the field, and one for the near side.
     
  4. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    It is likely that we're conversing amongst ourselves: the OP joined 13th October 2017, made this one post and subsequently has not logged in since that date.

    ***

    However, on the tangent topic of “best lenses for field sports” I have shot a lot of Field Hockey, Rugby Union and Football (Soccer). Typically three cameras (135 or FF Format): 24 to 70/2.8; 70 to 200/2.8; 400 /2.8. The 400/2.8 used on a monopod.

    That’s been the “Press Standard” sets of the three cameras / three lenses used by general pool photographers who might run the sideline, where I work: for big games there’d typically be a specialist at the end of the field with a 500/4 or rarely a 600/4, s/he’d also have a second camera, usually with a 70 to 200/2.8.

    The same three camera and three lens set I used for major swimming events which I covered regularly with digital since 2005.

    I use Canon DSLRs and I own a 24 to 70/2.8 and a 70 to 200/2.8 (and a 1.4MkII and 2.0MkII Extenders EF).

    As I have mentioned before on other conversations, if I were to put my own money into big lenses for my DSLRs, I’d buy a 300/2.8 and a 500/4.

    I think that those two as a pair, present the best value for money and the most flexible pair of big lenses and will accommodate mostly any photographic challenge, (and to have a x1.4MkII or MkIII to use with either).

    WW
     
  5. @William Michael I wish I had the funds for that :eek:
    But I'm kinda close. I shot basket ball with an EM1-mk1 + 12-100 (far side of the court) and my D7200 + 35/1.8 (near side of the court), and that combo worked nicely. Well, except for the EVF issue with the EM1, that limits its usability for fast sports.

    A 24-70/2.8 on a FX camera would be a nice companion to the 70-200 on a DX camera, when they come in close. But many times, the soccer action seems to move so fast that I'm not sure that I could switch cameras fast enough, though I have not tried. When they are on the other side of the field, there is enough time to switch cameras to/from the long lens.

    But at my age, I can't handle the weight of 3 cameras + big/heavy lenses.
     

Share This Page