- This topic is empty.
Sports photography
-
Sports shooters shooting Nikon (D3 series) are full frame. All Canon shooters would be crop sensors (1.3x 1D series, and 1.6x on other bodies).
Starting off, the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is the way to go. But, you will notice the limit in reach, no matter what body/sensor size you use.
Sigma do some good lenses (I’ve never used Sigma personally). Consider your budget and options before buying.
brownie wrote:
To answer the original question I know an f2.8 lens is essential if shooting any low light or night-time sport occasion. If you will be doing a lot of shooting during the day then an f4 will give you a nice effect and fast shutter speed which is essential. I suppose the question is…what can you afford to buy…I used the Canon 100-400 f5.6 for many years on a Canon 40D…got some great shots at Ireland games in Croke Park but missed a lot as well because of the f5.6 which resulted in too slow a speed.
The 7D is a great camera…8fps and great quality…ideally a second hand 1DMK 111 or 1DMK11n would be better if you are really serious and whatever you do try to save for the 70-200 f2.8 instead of f4…a world of difference and a lens you will hold onto for life…I guarantee that if you get the Canon f4, you will want to change within a few months but if most of your shooting is during the day it should suffice.
Do you have a budget ?Noel Browne.
My budget would probably be in & around £700. I’m looking at getting a 550D now, cause I’ll have a good bit then to spend on a lens. From what I’ve heard, the 7D has a poor autofocus system? Cause of the sports I cover, I need a good autofocus system. The f4 was what I’m looking at, but due to the fact this is Ireland & it’s usually cloudy I’ll need the extra light!
Starting off, the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is the way to go. But, you will notice the limit in reach, no matter what body/sensor size you use.
Sigma do some good lenses (I’ve never used Sigma personally). Consider your budget and options before buying.
I’m thinking of spending most of the £700 on the 70-200 2.8, but also spending a bit on a Sigma prime, something around 300mm. Just cause it’s cheaper (and yes, I know I might lose a little quality), then maybe during the summer I might sell the Sigma & get a 300mm L. Is this a good idea?
To be honest, the 550d isn’t much of an upgrade from the 1000d so you would be better off spending the money on a lens.
I used to have a sigma 70-200 and it was very good, excellent even so i would recommend it as a huge upgrade from the 55-200.
I’m looking at the 550D cause of the image sizes, 20mb for a RAW file on the 550 vs. 10mb for the 1000D. Someone told me I should get a 1100D, as an upgrade from the 1000D, but personally I think that would be utterly pointless. Another one I was looking at was the 50D. What’s it like does anyone know?
I used to have a sigma 70-200 and it was very good, excellent even so i would recommend it as a huge upgrade from the 55-200
Most lenses are an upgrade from that wee lens I have!! :lol: Would I be better buying the Sigma 70-200 new, or buying the 70-200 2.8 L second hand for a little more?
Sorry all you Nikon shooters…I should have researched more about the full-frame sensors on the pro Nikon cameras.
As per my knowledge, sports photography requires fast shutter speeds and faster reflexes from the photographer. Successful sports photography can be achieved with basic point and shoot cameras. There are photography opportunities everywhere; you just need to look in the right places.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
