Pentax and Lacrosse

[kfrog]

<p>I have an opportunity to shoot some high school lacrosse matches from time to time and it got me to thinking more about Pentax, telephoto lenses and sports photography. I have a K10D and I want to be able to use it. for this. I used a Nikon D90 with a Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 last time out and it gave me the reach but of course not the speed. (It's not my personal camera.)</p>

<p>For my K10D what would be some suggested lenses for shooting lacrosse and sports in general? I was thinking the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 would be my best bet in terms of quality, price and reach but I hear it's not the fastest focusing. I may be shooting in all hours of the day and at night under the lights.</p>

<p>I want to get a K-5 but for now the K10D will have to do.</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>The K10D will be ok while the K-5 drops in price. It will do better in daylight for a variety of reasons.</p>

<p>I shot some dog agility trials with the K10D and the Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 (actually just got an offer for 3 of the photos from an advertising agency, working out terms now), all I can say is dog agility is way faster than football, soccer, or lacrosse by a significant margin. Those dogs run a 40 in like 3 seconds while turning corners. At NFL combines they run 40s in like 4 seconds without pads and in a straight line. So it's not even arguable what the faster sport is.</p>

<p>The Tamron might be the best in quality, but I had an issue with it focusing at all. Obviously a bum lens. I then got a (used) Sigma in Nikon mount which was very good, and eventually I traded the Sigma Nikon for a slightly older Sigma in Pentax (non SDM/HSM).</p>

<p>I have haven't used the Pentax Sigma much, but it's decent at 2.8, very good at F/4. and in daylight it's pretty wonderful between f/4 and f/5.6. I'm hoping to shoot my little brothers sports with it at some point this year to really test it out on the K-7. If not, I'll probably try it out at the dog agility trials in May. My Tokina was probably the best lens at that FL in Pentax in terms of both AF and IQ, at least in my unofficial comparisons.</p>

<p>I would say the minimum you would need for lacrosse is a 70-200mm, this obviously will confine you to 1/2 the field. I wouldn't even bother trying to find a lens for cross field, you would need something in the 400-600mm range. Perhaps in daylight add a 1.4X TC for a little more reach near field.</p>

<p>My advice, buy the best 70-200mm suited for sports. If the Tamron can do the focusing near as well as the Sigma, go Tamron, if the Sigma is pretty close to the tamron in IQ, but focuses better go Sigma.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, with Pentax it's either Tamron or Sigma. I haven't heard much about the Pentax 60-250mm autofocus (good or bad), but the IQ is excellent. It would make for a very good alternative to a 70-200mm IF you were mostly shooting in daylight. Plus it's weather sealed and lacrosse is an all weather sport!</p>

<p>Like with any sport, don't chase the action. If your shooting your local team, you know who the good players are, what the plays are, and when things happen in a game. Shoot smart and your K10D will do fine.</p>

[kfrog]

<p>Thanks for the recommendations Justin.</p>

<p>I don't know the team all that well but I have been able to figure out who the better players are. In the case of the last game the opposing teams administrator asked me to get some shots too so I just tried to get the best action I could. I didn't chase the action either. Too slow and old for that anyway, even if I tried!</p>

<p>I know what you mean by "1/2 the field'. I tried to max out at the 300mm end of the Nikkor and get something across the field... Not too good I'm afraid.</p>

<p>I will probably investigate the Sigma 70-200mm a little more because I don't know enough about it to have an opinion either way. Maybe I can get one at a good price since they recently came out with a newer version of the lens. </p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Generally speaking, if you have good access to the field/arena you can get away with shorter lenses by moving yourself around. The only downside is you are limited to your shooting zone, which sort of increases the need for lucky breaks.</p>

<p>During spring training a lot of professional baseball photographers shoot from the stands with shorter glass than otherwise needed, especially for the outfield.</p>

<p>The nice thing about the Sigma is matched Sigma TCs. The 1.4X would give you a 450mm effective f/4 which stopped down to f/4.5 or f/5.6 should give you nice sharpness and DOF. I foolishly sold off my Sigma TC a while back, only to have to track down another one now. But I think that combo on a K-7 should be pretty decent for outdoor daylight sports.</p>

<p>I don't know if Tamrons TCs are better or worse, or matched specifically for their lenses or not.</p>

<p> </p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>I think the AF speed for the DA*60-250mm was rated highly by photozone. Optical quality also rated very high. In terms of buying lenses with the future in mind, since the K-5 delivers at least a stop better noise control over the K10D, perhaps even 2 stops, along with higher ISO settings, the f/4 then becomes like f/2.8 or better by simply an increase of ISO. And the range is better at 60- 250mm without having to add a TC resulting in quality loss. And a nice range to be able to zoom through for action shooting without having to change lenses!</p>

<p>Not an easy decision, however. Still can be nice to have f/2.8, and Sigma does offer some good matching TC's with 1.5x getting you out to 300mm f/4 with still pretty good quality. The "macro" version of the Sigma lens is also well regarded. </p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>My daughter plays lacrosse and I've been pretty pleased with the Sigma 70-200mm macro HSM. My only frustration related to reach so I've acquired a second hand Sigma 100-300mm f4 and I'm looking forward to the start of the season. </p>