Low Light Sports Lenses for a newbie
 

Hi all, Ok before anyone states the obvious yes i would love to buy the 70-200 f2.8 is canon L series lens but i cannot justify that sort of layout as yet.

The shots i take are ringside and up to 5 metres away of wrestling matches.
I know i need the power of a f2.8 lens but am unsure of the realistic options i have available to me. Image stabilisation is a definite yes as the action is very fast at times.

I am looking for realistic suggestions of lenses that i know will not be of the quality of the canon but will be a good step in the right direction and will not be totally unusabe in the future.

I am guessing the sorts of zoom range i am looking at is anywhere from 17 - 125mm please help!

(canon 500d)

IS is there to reduce camera shake but it does nothing to reduce blur from fast action. You need high ISO and wide apertures to give high shutter speeds. Which camera do you have, crop camera or full frame as that affects choice? I presume you have Canon or you would not mention the Canon lens.

Sorry i have a canon 500d 1.6 crop sensor

I am aware that i need to use high iso, its more the use of the words blur and shake - apologies. I have been shooting with the kit lens 18-55 at iso 1600 with ok results but having to do alot of post production.

I am a nikon owner but also looking for a fast lens, im going to get the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED Lens which is expensive but ive seen them second hand for a reasonable price.

This does'nt help you but i was also looking at cheaper alternatives and the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 Lens for canon seems to fit the bill. Alot of people on flickr seem to rate it and can be picked up for £250 on ebay.

Obvious question, price range?

At the moment anything less than the canon.

I really am open to all options

Additional info i plan to make up my complete kit with other lenses as follows

sigma 18-250 f3.5 - 6.3 superzoom
or rated 70 - 300 zoom must go down to at least f3.5
50mm 1.8 prime lens

and........ your recommendations
for the fast lens

initial thoughts are 17-70 f2.8 sigma or tamron
canon 24-70mm
but please tell me lenses you have used or are using as a newbie i know i will buy and upgrade when the time is right

thanks in advance

What about a Canon 135 or 200mm prime lens? Both open up to f2.8

think these will be too big as i can be as close as 1metre from the action so i believe these are too big and better for portraiture

OK, grab the 100mm then ;-) Or even the 50mm prime should be fine really.

50mm prime being purchased as we speak, but what about a lens with the advantage of zoom?

I have not used any of those lenses but two thoughts occur to me 1) The canon 24-70 2.8 is much more expensive than the others. 2) on a crop camera the wide end is not very wide, about 38mm equivalent, so will that matter for your subject?

no i think it should be ok as i am using the mid range on my 18-55 kit lens at the moment, its more about sigma or tamron equivalents in that range. Is there any chance i could get away without IS or VR?

anyone used a non VR/IS lens for sports?

See post #2.

i understand the post #2 but anyone actually used non is for sports handheld shooting?

the f1.8 50mm prime will do at iso400-800,some noise,but i would expect an improvement on iso1600,but as a starting point will be fine,and motion blur might add a certain feel to the shots ?

Motion blur could indeed be used for effect.

It would be helpful if you had a sample shot of the environment you plan to be taking pictures in and posted the EXIF data (aperture, shutter speed, ISO). That way we could work out what sort max aperture you need.

Motion blur can add to effect but you don't want it in every shot, you want it as a deliberate option. Secondly motion blur is best when used to depict action, it is an obvious mistake when the wrestlers are obviously pretty static but nothing is in sharp focus due to motion blur. Nothing beats as fast a lens as possible which in the case of a zoom means f2.8 and then add a high ISO speed with noise reduction software if necessary. As far as IS goes of course it is better to have everything else being equal but I would go for the fact that the Canon 24-70 maintains it's f2.8 all the way through the zoom range where as the other two don't which may well make the long end of their range useless for your specific needs. Only snag is the cost.

Also, if you're close to the action, wouldn't it be best to use a flashgun?

I think he would find it quite hard to walk after the wrestlers had put his flash gun where they would not be blinded by the flash! :D:eek::D

Why IS won't help (much)
 

The attached shot of my daughter's school rock band is with IS on - but I couldn't use flash and so with ISO 800 and f4 I was only getting a shutterspeed of a 1/10th. The IS has helped to give pretty reasonable sharpness on the drum kit and anything else that isn't moving but of course at a 10th there is motion blur on the band members. Hopefully you have a bit more light than this but f2.8 will be essential and as much ISO as you noise reduction skills can handle.

Incidentally the ageing rocker rear right is the English Master who played with Led Zepplin in his youth.

The obvious thing to do is to put the 50mm lens you now have on aperture priority and f2.8 and see what results you get. Wide aperture really is the key here along with high ISO.