User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  5
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Indoor Sports Lens

  1. #1
    Member spootz01's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Jan 2016
    Location
    Mount Barker
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Indoor Sports Lens

    Hi All,

    Just looking for a little bit of advice on lens choice.

    I am looking at shooting some volleyball in the winter. My main issue is lenses; specifically fixed aperture. I am looking at a 70-200 but cant decide on whether to splash out and get a 2.8 or save my pennies (and my arms) and settle for the F4.

    bit of background:
    The gym's they play in are relatively well lit with halogen lights (doesn't mean much I know)
    I am shooting on canon (600D)

    Cheers

    S.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Current Gear:
    Canon 600D | Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 | Canon 50mm f1.8 II | Tamron 150-600m f5-6.3 | Manfrotto 680B Monopod
    All kept in: Lowepro Protactic 350AW

    The GAS never ends.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  2. #2
    Ausphotography Addict Lplates's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 2011
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    10,341
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Tamron 70-200 f2.8 is an excellent lens
    Glenda


  3. #3
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    5,350
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I second Lplates thoughts.

    I have one and can highly recommend it. It will give you 112-320mm at a fixed f2.8 on your camera.

    I'm referring to the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD and not the earlier 'Macro' version that is still floating around.
    Cheers
    Kev

    D600 : D7200 and too much stuff to list

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    spootz01's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Jan 2016
    Location
    Mount Barker
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah I'm looking at that lens. My big dilemma is whether to get that to add to my sports kit (my bread and butter), or save $500ish and pick up the Sigma 24-105 f4 to replace my current sigma and also give me a bit more versatility for shooting other things.

    And before anyone says it, I know the 70-200 is a fantastic all around lens but I've got a couple of shoots lined up that are in close quarters and 70 at the short end I fear will by too tight.

  5. #5
    Member Shav Bird Photography's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Dec 2015
    Location
    Noarlunga
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by spootz01 View Post
    Yeah I'm looking at that lens. My big dilemma is whether to get that to add to my sports kit (my bread and butter), or save $500ish and pick up the Sigma 24-105 f4 to replace my current sigma and also give me a bit more versatility for shooting other things.

    And before anyone says it, I know the 70-200 is a fantastic all around lens but I've got a couple of shoots lined up that are in close quarters and 70 at the short end I fear will by too tight.
    I have the Tamron 70-200 that Lplates is referring to. Top lens for indoor sports. Only marginly slower than the Nikon F2.8 which retails for over 3k. But quality wise I prefer the Tamron. As for close quarter shots with a crop body, it's not that bad. Sure you have to do a bit more work to maneuverer yourself back into the right position but it's not a massive hassle. I recommend getting a monopod for the Tamron if you decide to go in that direction. The weight of the lens is enough to make your arms tired especially during a long game. I also have a Sigma 18-50mm F1.8 lens I used for everyday and landscape shots too which I can easily swap over if the Tamron doesnt fit the bill.
    Cheers
    Shav

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter
    spootz01's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Jan 2016
    Location
    Mount Barker
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    18-50 would be perfect as I do plan on getting the 70-200 later... But it appears its no longer made

    Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by spootz01 View Post
    Hi All,

    Just looking for a little bit of advice on lens choice.

    I am looking at a 70-200 but cant decide on whether to splash out and get a 2.8 or save my pennies (and my arms) and settle for the F4.

    .
    Quote Originally Posted by spootz01 View Post
    Yeah I'm looking at that lens. My big dilemma is whether to get that to add to my sports kit (my bread and butter), or save $500ish and pick up the Sigma 24-105 f4 to replace my current sigma and also give me a bit more versatility for shooting other things.
    Excuse me if I am wrong but from the generalised thoughts above I would suggest that you ---

    #a Do some exercise to handle a larger lens if you feel that you can't manage the gear as you are. That part is an essential part of photography.
    #b Forget the measly $500.00 saving and buy the best gear possible seeing as sports photography is your "bread and butter" as the expenditure versus return will negate that issue pretty quickly.
    Last edited by I @ M; 14-01-2016 at 7:56pm.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  8. #8
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    28 Jan 2009
    Location
    Logan Reserve, QLD
    Posts
    2,862
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would get the 70-200 and definitely splurge to get the 2.8. I've shot at a lot of sports grounds, and you will need the 2.8 even if you think it's well lit. I've shot at suncorp stadium, and even with all those lights, you STILL have to bump up the ISO to get a fast enough shutter speed..
    Happy to take all constructive Critique, please don't rework or edit my photos. Thanks!

    Canon 6D, 2 Canon 50D's gripped, Canon 1000D, Canon 70-200 F2.8 ( non IS),Canon 70-200 2.8, Canon 24-70 2.8, Sigma 85 1.4, Canon 50mm F1.8.. yongnuo speedlights and triggers, and manfrotto tripods.


  9. #9
    Member Shav Bird Photography's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Dec 2015
    Location
    Noarlunga
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by spootz01 View Post
    18-50 would be perfect as I do plan on getting the 70-200 later... But it appears its no longer made

    Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk
    I have the ART series 18-50mm Sigma and I do believe it is still available if you are willing to part with the coin. But it also depends what brand body you have too. I did hear there was a short supply of Nikon mounted Tamron's recently but that should have been sorted now.

  10. #10
    Ausphotography Veteran MattNQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Dec 2010
    Location
    Townsville
    Posts
    2,370
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Agree with above comments - Definitely spend the extra $$ to get f2.8.

    I've been shooting indoor netball during the day with extra light from open roller doors and I have still been at f2.8 and ISO 3200-6400

    I wouldn't bother with a monopod. Small court games like netball & volleyball you'll often have to move quickly to follow the ball/play - a monopod will just get in the way.
    Matt
    CC always appreciated

    My Main Gallery and Even More Pics
    A Blog of sorts


  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular MissionMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Feb 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,824
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would definitely get the f/2.8, if you are doing sports you can cut out the VR but the f/2.8 is critical for low light. The VR component only helps with stationary objects which won't be much help for sports

    I would also get the Tamron 70-200. I have the Nikon and I don't believe it's worth twice as much as the Nikon.
    Fuji XT-2, Fuji X-E3, Fuji X100T, Fuji VPB-XT2, Fujinon 16-55 f/2.8, Fujinon 50-140 f/2.8, Fujinon 35 f2, Fujinon 90 f/2, Fujinon 60 f/2.4 Macro, Yongnuo YN560 IV, Yongnuo YN560 TX, Benro C3580T, Mefoto Q00
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/atholhill
    http://www.theoverratedphotographer.com
    https://www.instagram.com/theoverratedphotographer/


  12. #12
    Ausphotography Regular basketballfreak6's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Sep 2013
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    921
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    sigma has just announced a 50-100mm f/1.8 zoom...will be amazing lens for indoor sports on crop body me thinks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •