Telephoto sports lens for D70

Does anyone have any experience w/ sports photography with the Nikon

D70? I take hockey pictures... am looking for a good telephoto

lens. I've been researching the SIGMA 170-500 mm f/5-6.3 Aspherical

RF APO LENS - but have seen some reviews saying slow autofocus not

good for sports.

 

Appreciate any input. Thanks!

Not only is slow for auto focus, it�s slow for light too, especially indoor hockey. Look for a used 80-200 AFD Nikon f2.8

IMO, the AF in the D70 is too slow for sports photography, at least AF sports, and no lens is going to be able to fix that inherent problem.

 

Of course people are going to suggest all sorts of manual-focus techniques for sports. Assuming that those techniques indeed work in general, you are likely going to have a hard time manual focusing with the D70's small viewfinder.

 

In other words, IMO there are no easy solutions. I wouldn't use any camera that is based on the Multi-CAM 900 AF module for sports photography. That includes the N80, N75, D100, D70, the Fuji S2, and those Kodak 14MP DSLRs with the Nikon mount.

Have just completed a Sports and Action photography class taught by Ross Franklin of the Washington Times. The D70 is perfectly adequate - I shot the last few assignments with it. The lens you've chosen might not be, however- you want FAST lenses. Fast fast fast. not only because they permit a higher shutter speed, but because most excellent action shots have a clean background - and that's a lot easier to do with a very shallow depth of field.

 

You might consider the Sigma 70-200/2.8 HSM (HSM being Sigma's knockoff of AF-S)... it's not quite as sharp as the Nikon 80-200/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 but isn't too far short.

One thing to think about with any sports photography is being able to shoot when the action is next to you. 170mm is too long for that. One sports photog friend got the Canon 35-350 and went with Canon for that lens... I've been relatively happy with the Tamron 28-300 on my D70 for outside sports. It's not a 2.8 but, it is <$400... (Waiting and saving for for the Nikon 35-350 F2.8...)

Melissa, I'm in the exact same situation as you. I shoot my son's hockey games with my N75 (same CAM-900 AF sensor as you), and it works fine (not that a higher sensor wouldn't be better!). I use my Tokina 100-300 f/4 with very good results. I like having a zoom, because the action comes and goes toward and away from me. The Tokina is VERY highly reviewed by those who have used it (Google for it), is super sharp (surprisingly so at f/4), has unbelievable bokeh (may not account for much in hockey pics, but...), and is built like a TANK. AF is also shockingly fast, even with my humble little N75.

 

Check this option out. Then have some at KEH in the $300-350 range. You couldn't go wrong!

The D70 is fine for sports, the AF action is fine, I OWN and USE one regularly. It was fine with the 80-200 AFD (not s) F2.8 and even better with the 70-200 AFSGVR. Decide what your budget is and get the best you can reasonably afford, upgrading later is where the real expense lies. I personally think the Sigma at F5-6.3 is too slow, esp for indoor hockey. If you can afford an "S" lens which mean Nikon Silent Wave focusing you will be pleased, there are two models that cover 70/80-200 range, the F2.8 is more important than extra focal length for indoor sports, you will need the faster shutter speed. Check out KEH for older model 80-200 F2.8 without "S" and I bet you get a Nikon legend for under $500.

The d70 forum I have been following has had a number of excellent sprort (racing, hockey, etc) photos shown. The camera is more than capable. There have been excellent reports on the Sigma 70-200/2.8 HSM zoom. I don't have one yet, those who do say they get excellent results, fast AF, and quality as good or better than the Nikon equivalent, a good but older model.

I would suggest using the original "hockey puck" camera, the F3!

Go for the 70~200/2.8G ED-IF VR AF-S Nikkor. Learn to pre-focus using an AF only approach. Set the focus mode to Continuous Servo. Focus on the spot where you expect the action. Release the shutter release button. Follow the action into your zone of focus. Hope for the best. Even on the F5 the 80~200/2.8D ED AF Nikkor (with tripod collar) is on the AF slow side. On any camera with a CAM 900 AF module it�s hopeless.

 

If you have yet to buy the camera ask yourself this question. Is an occasional sharp photo acceptable or do you want to cover the event as a news event where specific plays need to be captured in focus? If it�s the latter buy a different camera.

 

---

 

The original "hockey puck" camera is the Nikon F.

(I must have gotten a later puck.)

I am aware the F100 and F5 has a faster autocam ... 1300 is it?

The F5, F100 and all cameras from the D1 series use the Multi-CAM 1300, which is the minimum I would use for sports photography. The D2H uses the Multi-CAM 2000, which has 11 AF points.

The D70 is probably perfect for slow paced sports: Backgammon. Chess. You get the picture :)

Guys, if the person who asked the question is not working for Sports Illustrated, then the D70 might be perfectly adequate for her needs. So why not give some lens suggestions?

 

It doesn't take a sports photographer to tell you that a 170-500 mm f/5-6.3 is too long and too slow. If as you say the AF is slow, then so much the worse.

 

If you can afford it, the AFS 70-200 2.8G is probably a good choice. The 2.8 aperture will let you see what you're shooting, will let the camera see so it can focus faster, will help in low-light situations, and will help isolate your subject. The AF-S will make focusing a little faster and a lot smoother. The 70-200 zoom range translates into 105-300mm for a digital camera, which should give flexibility for sports shooting.

 

If the 70-200 is too expensive, look for something that has as many of these qualities as possible.

<em>"I must have gotten a later puck." --Alex

Lofquist<br>

</em><br>

<br>

I believe Marty Forscher, the famous camera repairman was the one

who referred to the Nikon F as a hockey puck. Hope I spelled his

name correctly. Does anyone know where one might find the

original quote?<br>

<br>

There is a wealth of information about the F3 here... <br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/photography.htm"

target="_new"><u>http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/photography.htm</u></a><br>

<br>

The site is down just now so I can be more specific but there is

a section where they list the many things that were done to make

the F3 the reliable work horse it is. Things like epoxy coating

on the circuits to protect against moisture and corrosion.<br>

<br>

"A later puck" is a good way to put it.<br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

<em>"So why not give some lens suggestions?" --Norman

Morman<br>

</em><br>

I did Norman, I did... <br>

<br>

I recommended the AF-S 70~200/2.8G ED-IF VR. I might add the AF-S

80~200/2.8D ED-IF. I dont think anything but an AF-S lenses

will be of any use.<br>

<br>

Try standard AF pre-focus techniques so the camera doesnt

have to search as much. B. Moose Peterson may explain how he does

this for wildlife, birds in flight, etc. As I recall he was using

an F5 at that time.<br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.moose395.net" target="_new"><u>http://www.moose395.net</u></a><br>

<br>

One thing you want for many sporting events is shallow DOF. This

helps separate the action from the background or spectators in

the background. This is a reason I recommend an f/2.8 lens.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave.