Good lens for indoor sports?

[the_game22]

What would be a good lens to get for taking pics of indoor sports such as Volleyball, Basketball & hockey.
I just looking at getting an SLR system. I was looking at Futureshops sale on the XTi kit with the zoom lens for $1000, but everything I have read points to those lenses as not being very good. If I don't go with that deal I was considering getting just the body with a 17-85 is lens from B&H. But I don't know if that would work so well for action sporrts. I am working on a budget of about $1200, So any suggestions? Thanks in advance.

[sliderr]

If want to do indoor sports and don't necessarily have a lot of cash, just get the body and get yourself an F2.8 or faster single aperature lens with IS. The 70-200mmf4L/IS might do the trick as it has the latest IS (4 stops) but I can't comment on that yet.

Even with the canon rebates you're still looking >$1200.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Indoor sports is probably one of the most demanding photographic situations, equipment-wise. Long story short, the lighting sucks. IS/VR is next to useless because you need a fast shutter speed to freeze the action. An f/2.8 or faster lens and ISO 1600 or greater on the camera is generally considered bare minimum, though it can get a bit easier if the lighting is OK.

So, what can you do?

The absolute cheapest way that I can think of would be a used camera and used lens. A used XT/Xti for Canon or a used D50/D70s for Nikon. Combine that with a used Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX HSM or Nikon 80-200 f/2.8, and you could probably get the whole kit (minus memory cards, etc.) for about $1000.

If you buy new, it's really not going to happen under $1200, unless you can get close enough to the action that a 50mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.8 prime will do the trick. That might work for volleyball or basketball if you're willing to do some legwork.

[the_game22]

Thanks for the replies. I am getting a little impatient to get myself a DSLR. I think I am going to bite the bullet and get one and upgrade to a good lens for Sports down the road.
I am looking at the XTi kit at futureshop with the 18-55 kit lens and the 70-300 for $1000. or would the body with the 17-85 IS for about $1200 shipped out of the States be better. (i think it was B&H)
I also saw an XTi bundled with a 28-135 IS lens for about $1150 on another site.
Any opinions on the bundled packages on Ebay??
Either of these would be good "GENERAL USE" lenses, Right??
I realize that it depends on the situation. I have been doing a lot of reading and need to do more. I appreciate the advice from you guys as it seems like there are some really talented people on here.

[ex1z7]

Wider aperture, more light, which allows for a faster shutter, which gets you better photo's when it comes to sports, blurry sports shots are weak.

That being said, picking up a used body is easy, they're everywhere .. Just gotta look and know what you're looking for.. Ask here if you find a deal you want help making a more concrete decision on.

Don't rush, you waste lots of money when you rush... Make intelligent decisions based on hands on experienced reviewers, magazine articles from reputable photographers, and actually test if you can.. The difference between F/2.8 and F/4 is huge.. it can make or break a shot.

That being said, check out ritzcamera and adorama, they frequently have WICKED deals. . .

And no, eBay is lame. Gray market for the lose.

[mr_ballroom]

HI,

If indoor sports is what you want, then look on eBay for a good combo DSLR and the mentioned 70-200 or 80-200 F2.8 lenses.

You will need F2.8. Don't waste your money on any of those 70-300 type lenses.

Good luck.
Andrew

[svtlight]

remember the 80-200 doesn't have VR.. the 70-200 does for the nikon lenses

[seer_claw]

Originally posted by svtlight
remember the 80-200 doesn't have VR.. the 70-200 does for the nikon lenses

Yes, it does but the cost difference is astronomical. Thats the problem with shooting indoor sports. You are really looking at spending a lot of money to get good looking shots.

If you want to see what different apertures do for a lens and lighting, look at the 50 f1.8 and the 85 f1.8. Both of these lenses are not too expensive and can get you started in the correct direction as to how fast a lens you will need for shooting. Yes, they are fixed length but that shouldn't make too big a difference as most DSLR's give a decent ability to crop without losing too much quality.

[the_game22]

Thanks for the advice guys. I have ordered an XTi with kit lens from B&H. I also got the 50 f/1.8 as it was cheap and figured I couldn't go wrong at that price. Something to get me started while I save up for more lenses.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by svtlight
remember the 80-200 doesn't have VR.. the 70-200 does for the nikon lenses

Also remember that VR does nothing to freeze action, and at the shutter speeds required to freeze fast action, camera shake is of little worry.

[ex1z7]

And most of those action shots are taken on monopods or tripods where VR is hindered as well.

[svtlight]

I'm confused I thought VR would let you shoot at 4 speeds faster.. and why is it hindered on a monopod??

[muse017]

VR/IS has nothing to do with freezing action. Faster lens will give you more rooms in terms of shutter speed and will freeze action easily. VR/IS reduce the possibility of having blurry pics from very low light situations(requires slow shutter speed).

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by svtlight
I'm confused I thought VR would let you shoot at 4 speeds faster.. and why is it hindered on a monopod??

No, VR allows you to shoot at 4 stops slower than you can usually hand-hold, as it compensates for your (relatively) shaky hands. The only things that affect the max shutter speed for a given lighting situation are max aperture and ISO.

[clem24]

This totally reminds me an ad I saw on TV for a Panasonic camera with image stabilizer (just a P&S). I think they had a rock concert or dance club or something where the subject was moving very fast under dim lighting, and their "miracle" IS system would get you clear pictures (with the usual simulated, sharp, pictures).

Of course, we all know IS does NOTHING for exposure time, which means everything in the foreground/background should've been fairly non-blurred, while the subject should've been blurred.. LOL, just thought it was the stupidest ad ever... Though we know this kind of consumer mis-information sells.

In response to this thread, if you're on a budget, GO CANON. I would not recommend either the D50 or D70 for high ISO. Any of the current and past (20D, etc..) Canon offerings will kick both these cams in the ass. You should definitely be happy with the XTi.

[svtlight]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


No, VR allows you to shoot at 4 stops slower than you can usually hand-hold, as it compensates for your (relatively) shaky hands. The only things that affect the max shutter speed for a given lighting situation are max aperture and ISO.

I don't get it.. if you click on any VR lens on their site it says..

"VR operation offers the equivalent of using a shutter speed 3 stops (eight times) faster*

http://www.nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?...&disp=Features

I'd still also like to know how it is hindered on a monopod? I would imagine VR + a monopod would be great coupled together

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by svtlight


I don't get it.. if you click on any VR lens on their site it says..

"VR operation offers the equivalent of using a shutter speed 3 stops (eight times) faster*

Yes, that's half-true. It's 4-stops effective at removing camera shake, but does nothing to freeze motion, as shutter speed is the only thing that can.

[svtlight]

ahh so "equivalent" would be the key word
Thanks!

[ex1z7]

Originally posted by svtlight


I don't get it.. if you click on any VR lens on their site it says..

"VR operation offers the equivalent of using a shutter speed 3 stops (eight times) faster*

http://www.nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?...;disp=Features

I'd still also like to know how it is hindered on a monopod? I would imagine VR + a monopod would be great coupled together

VR works by moving an element in the lens to compensate for you shaking the camera. Your camera isn't shaking if it's on a monopod / tripod now is it ...

When the camera is on a tri/monopod and VR is turned on, it gets confused because it wants to make a steady image so it's moving the glass, but it doesn't have to, which ends up making images slightly /worse/.

Nikon explains all this on their website - in "How VR Works" Google Nikon Japan.

[svtlight]

Alright, Thanks so much. I will turn it off when I use my lens on my monopod