Indoor sports - no flash allowed

fveglian

I shoot a majority of indoors sports such as swiming and gymnastics where no flash is allowed. I been fairly successful with the equipment that I have but, I believe there must be an optimum lens available for this type of shooting. My concern is the lack of adequate lighting. In your opinion what would be the best type of lense for this? I have a 28-105mm that 1:2.8 to 4 that isn't bad . Can I realistically afford anything better that will allow me to take these type of photos and be able to stop motion without a flash. I get alot of blurred photos now. A minimum zoom of 200mm is necessary in many instances.

Thanks.

Fred

FrankieAng

Hi Fred,

Is a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR able to handle your needs? The constant f/2.8 is certainly better than what you are currently shooting with. Your thoughts?

HarveyMushman

There's also the new AF-S VR 70-300/4-5.6, which at ~$500 is much more affordable than the 70-200/2.8 VR.

Don't forget you can bump the ISO up a few notches to buy yourself some extra shutter speed, especially if you shoot RAW.

Steve Cavigliano

Fred,
Many (non-flash) indoor action shooters face the same issues. Lack of decent lighting and the need for a fast lens with decent reach.

Personally, I have seldom been able to get decent exppsures with an F2.8 lens. I am usually relegated to using a lens closer to F2. Actually, between F1.8 and F2,2 to be exact. Even then I can have a hard time obtaining 1/500 speeds, using ISO1600.

I'd suggest looking into a fast prime, under 200mms, to do this task. Depending on your camera's FOV multiplier, an 85mm, 100mm or 135mm F2 or faster lens may give you the best exposure. Canon and Nikon have lens with these focal lengths and speeds for fairly decent prices. Well, except for the 135's There is also the out-of-production Canon 200mm F1.8 But, these have been going for around $4000 on ebay lately. That is THE lens,IMO, for what you shoot. Unfortunately, you might have to sell the house or the car to be able to afford one. And it's a heavy lens to tote on a bicycle...lol

In gyms with good light. Like college or pro level. You can get by with F2.8 or even slower glass. In those dingy elementary/Jr high/HS gyms, F2.8 is probably the maximum aperture you will be able to use. Even then, it may cause you to use a slower speed to get the proper exposure.


Steve

Jeffro

Remeber the 2.8 combined with ISO is going to give you the speed, the VR (Nikon) and IS (Canon) is only going to give you the ability to capture steady shots at lower shutter speeds, it will not stop action. If you don't plan on shooting slow shutter speeds, like with nature, don't spend the extra bucks on VR or IS. 1/125 and 1/250 is still just that, even with VR and IS, the only thing it will help steady is your movement, which a monopod can do too.

mercphoto

If you need a zoom you will need a 2.8 constant aperture lens. No amount of ISO will get around that. If you can get by with a prime then a nice 1.8 should do better.

Andy

Indoor swimming and gymnastics dream lens for Nikonians:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04052801nikkor200.asp

top notch glass!

johng

mercphoto wrote:

If you need a zoom you will need a 2.8 constant aperture lens. No amount of ISO will get around that. If you can get by with a prime then a nice 1.8 should do better.

Actually, as already pointed out, 2.8 just isn't good enough in many indoor instances. If your primary need is indoor sports you really need the fast prime lenses - 85, 100, 135 - in that area. It's one thing if indoor sports is an occasional thing for you in which case you can try to force the use of a 2.8 lens. But, if you're going to do a lot of it then go with the primes.

mercphoto

johng wrote:

Actually, as already pointed out, 2.8 just isn't good enough in many indoor instances.

And that could very well be true. And if so you are correct the best alternative is a fast prime. They're also much cheaper than a 2.8 zoom! But the suggested 70-300/4-5.6 is definitely not one to consider. ISO does not go high enough to use a lens like that indoors.

I'm a bit spoiled. My low-light action photography is outdoor motocross and flash is allowed. I set my 2.8 zoom at f/4 or 4.5 and let the flash give me the light I need and to reduce motion blur. I've considered an 85/1.8 not because I need the 1.8 but because I think it would help with auto-focus accuracy to let in more light. Yet another reason to go with a fast prime for indoor sports -- more light makes AF easier.

Sounds like an 85/1.8 or a 135/2 would be the ticket for him then. f/2 doesn't sound like a lot of improvement from f/2.8 but it is an entire stop. Which means twice the light. Which means either twice as fast a shutter or half the ISO.