High school football

[bulldog3]

<p>Is 200mm long enough for football? I am on a limited budget and wavering between the 18-200 (original version) and the 70-300. I know the 18-200 is more versatile, but wonder if I need the 300's extra reach. Please note I am asking a sincere question. Don't need the pros and or elites reply saying spend the $1,000.00 and get faster lens. This is a hobby to shoot my son. Thanks in advance for any help.</p>

[phule]

<p>The problem is that, when you're talking about outdoors at night under your average high school lights, you will really need those $1000 lenses because there simply is not enough light. The aperture range on an 18-200 or consumer 70-300 is going to be too small.</p>

<p>It's a bit like asking "How can I move across the state and put everything I own in a Smart. Don't tell me I need a moving truck."</p>

<p>At some point, you're going to need a moving truck.</p>

<p>I'd think that 200mm is likely to be too short, but you don't say anything about where you're going to be shooting from.</p>

[frank_skomial]

<p>The 2 lenses you mentioned will work OK under daylight condition, especially on sunny days.</p>

<p>The most economical and yet great lenses would be the 80-200/2.8 and the 180/2.8 Nikkor lenses, that should be just below the magic $1000.</p>

[ben_goren]

<p>Dan,</p>

 

<p>It depends, almost entirely, on just two factors: what camera do you have, and what do you plan

on doing with the pictures?</p>

 

<p>If your camera is from the latest batch, it should have good high ISO performance, which should

get you in the ballpark (so to speak). And if you’re just planning on emailing the pictures or

putting them on the Web, then you should be just fine with a short slow lens. Be prepared to crop <em>and reduce (scale)</em> the pictures before showing them. And make sure you know how to get the best out of them (by sharpening, <i>etc.</i>).</p>

 

<p>Some of your better shots will probably be okay as 4″ × 6″ prints. I

wouldn’t expect anything to stand up to 8″ × 10″, but I wouldn’t

be shocked if you (very, very rarely) get one or two if the stars all come into alignment.

There’s no way you’ll ever get better than that.</p>

 

<p>So, if that’s “good enough” for you, then sure. It’s long enough.</p>

 

<p>Oh — another thing. Superzooms on a DSLR almost never make sense. If you think it

does, then a digicam with a superzoom almost certainly makes much more sense —

it’ll have all the advantages and then some, and probably it won’t have any additional

disadvantages worth worrying about.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

[bulldog3]

<p>Thanks for the help. I will be on the sidelines. I have a Nikon D50. The pictures are personal. Obviiously I will make them available to the other parents, but this is not a business. I will check Frank's suggested 80-200 lens, see if I can find one used. </p>

[nathan_meador]

<p>If you are on the sidelines, 200mm should be fine, and will get you pretty tight shots of any player on the half of the field closest to you. You might also look at Sigma or Tamron 70-200mm f2.8's, they are going to be around $800 new, but I've seen used at KEH.com for around $500-$600.</p>

[brian_bishop2]

<p>With a crop sensor camera 200mm is gonna do ok. Just don't try to shoot anything on the far sideline. Try to get good tight shots of plays coming to your side of the field. I like to focus on the player's eyes. If you're forced to run the ISO up real high, the free edition of Neat Image noise reduction does a pretty fair job of removing the worst of the noise. Keep your shutter speed around 1/250 or higher to get decent sharpness. If you shoot in RAW, even if they're a stop underexposed you can recover pretty decent photos. In the end, 2.8 is the way to go!<br>

Good luck.<br>

BRB</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Dan - </p>

<p>The 18-200 will be fine, except for really dark / dim night games... Although back in the 70's I shot HS Football in a crypt (almost literally) with Tri-x pushed to 1600 and a cruddy Vivitar 135 f 4 on a Fuji 35mm. Talk about ancient...</p>

<p>Anyway - the 70-300 is a nice lens, I haven't heard many complaints about it either because there are none or it's not as widely used / purchased as the 18-200. The 18-200 (org. model) is perhaps the most loved or hated lens in Nikon's arsenal. You either love it or you hate it. Apparently there were some quality issues at some point due to the number of similar complaints about that lens. Myself, I have 2 of them and I love them.</p>

<p>Sigma's 70-200 is about 600.00 when you can find it on Ebay / B/H or Adorama. It's a nice lens and for me works as well as the Nikon 70-200 VR.</p>

<p>One thing that hasn't been pointed out here...Make sure that it's okay for you to be on the sidelines. Many schools limit who can be on the sidelines and for what purpose. The school may have liability / insurance issues, not to mention an exclusive contract with a vendor for providing photos of the game for sale. Even though you stated the photos are as a "hobby"...you did mention that you might get some to other parents... Many photographers who have built that relationship with the school / booster club may not take kindly to someone "poaching" their business.</p>

<p>Good Luck -</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[seragram]

<p>Yes you can shoot football with a 200mm if you can get up close to the field. Attached is a sample from a game I shot this weekend using my 200mm 2.8. Try and get lens with at least 2.8 like other have said. It its really dark on youth ball games stadiums and gyms. You are looking at f/2.8 ASA 1,600 and up. an f/4 or f/5.6 lens in not what you want.<br /> BTW if you are shooting with Canon B&H has the Telephoto EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Autofocus Lens for $734.95<br /> Sergio</p><div></div>

[bulldog3]

<p>Thanks guys for all the good advice. This is a brand new HS and I have clearance to be on the field. Now to the sites you mentioned to find a 2.8. More expensive initial outlay, but seems necessary.</p>

[mark_wagner7]

<p>Dan,</p>

<p>If renting is an option in your area I would highly recommend it. Renting allows you to evaluate what lens works best without the financial obligation and lets you use a lens that would otherwise be financially out of reach.</p>

<p>I do this for my son's baseball and football. I rent a Nikon 400mm f/2.8 AF-S for $80 per day or for the same amount if I need it over the weekend. This is a +$8,000 lens and not a purchase option for me at the present time. Renting allows me to use a fantastic lens at a VERY reasonable cost. </p>

<p>Hope this helps.</p>

<p>Mark</p>

 

[rayt]

<p>For the high schools that I visit I don't need a large zoom. A 100mm is long enough. Why? Because I have to use flash and my flash will not illuminate the entire field nor will it illuminate across the field. Without flash, even with high ISO, f2.8, an evening game it is almost impossible to get a high enough shutter speed. And those stadium lights are just an absolute horrible color.</p>

<p>High school football stadiums are not nearly as well lit as collegiate stadiums. But are more relaxed about where you can take pictures along with fewer restrictions on your movement.</p>

<p>One last piece of advice from painful experience as you will be on the sidelines. If you hear thundering feet immediately turn and run the opposite direction preferably hiding behind someone else.</p>

[brian_bishop2]

<p>If you're out around 100mm or more and there's nothing closer that can get blown out by the extra light, you can raise your flash ex comp to +2 stops to get farther reach with your flash. Just remember to turn it back down when shooting sideline candids and cheerleader shots or they will be overexposed if not blown out completely.<br>

Raymond is dead on about the thundering feet thing! Hide behind someone very large.<br>

BRB</p>

[greg_herriman]

<p>Dan,<br>

Although I've gotten good results shooting sports with my Nikkor 18-200mm AF-S f/3.5-5.6 VR, the best quality photos come with the f/2.8 lens groups. I agree with Mark Wagner's post and recommend renting a pro lens (f/2.8) if you can. I rent a 300MM NIKKOR AF-S ED IF f/2.8D lens for $65/day. This lens would set you back over $3000 if you bought it. The best part of renting is trying a lens out before you plunk down some serious cash. I've rented and "test drove" a number of lenses including the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (another great lens used by sports photographers). If you rent a lens, please confirm that it will work with your D50. Also, invest $35 to $70 in software like Noise Ninja (www.picturecode.com). It has a stand alone as well as Photoshop plug-in solution for removing noise & grain from digital photographs. It's also great for low-light or fast-action situations (like night time high school football) where high ISO photography is required. My last bit of advice is try to shoot no more than ISO 1600 (400-800 is better), a minimum shutter speed of 1/250, under expose 1/3 stop, set white balance at "Incandescent" and use the lowest fstop you have available. <br>

Best of luck<br>

GCH</p>

[bulldog3]

<p>Thanks to all who gave advice. Purchased the 18-200 and shot 100+ images at first game. Did fine. I realize it is early in season so 6PM game still has decent light. Very surprised how well they turned out. As it gets later in season with it getting dark by game time, I will see how well the county provided lights work.</p>

[gia_hillenbrand]

<p>Can we see any of what you captured?</p>