Suggestion for second Basketball Lens???

Daren3006

Hello All,

Just started shooting basketball for our local high schools and I've discovered that my Canon 70-200 2.8L IS is just a bit too long (especially with the 40D crop)! Can anyone suggest a second lens to add to my photo bag for basketball? I'm partial to Canon but am not opposed to other brands as long as they are comparable to the "L" series lenses.

I've been looking at the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L or the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II. Also looking to use the lens for wrestling. Your opinions and suggestions would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thanks,
Daren
www.DiersPhotography.com

wmstumme

I played around with a 50mm 1.8f last year, which helped with the light issues, but in most instances was too short and had trouble getting good focus (seemed slow). But it was certainly the right price!

I'm looking to pick up a 85mm 1.8 sometime soon--but have heard mixed reviews on it as well (slow focus...).

I'd like the flexibility of zooms, but worry about the low light compromises of 1.8 vs. 2.8f. I'm shooting in horribly lit elementary and middle school gyms.

I'll be watching this thread with interest as well to see what suggestions come in before I break out the checkbook...

Ann McRae

Haven't specifically shot basketball yet. However I have shot alot of indoor soccer with, believe it or not, worse lighting than school gyms. I've also shot jr. high volleyball.

The 85 1.8 is great. It isn't slow - I've never heard that before either.

I also really like the 135 f2 as it has many, many uses and I guess I just like that focal length combined with the wonderful image quality.

I do not think anyoe can successfully shoot indoor sports with a f2.8 lens - just not fas enough for those lighting conditions.

with the 85mm:

KED

wmstumme wrote:

I'm looking to pick up a 85mm 1.8 sometime soon--but have heard mixed reviews on it as well (slow focus...).

I think you are thinking of the 85 1.2, whose AF is considered too slow for sports. By consensus the 1.8 is blazing fast and, as a non-L lens, a bargain as well with no sacrifice in performance or build quality. I picked one up recently, trying it out for the first time in earnest next weekend.

PineapplePhoto

What camera do you have? cropped sensor or full?

An 50mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8 will help you just fine.

f2.8 is WAY TOO SLOW for indoor basketball. Unless you have a 1D Mark III and you can shoot ISO 3200+

Daren3006

I don't know that I would agree that you can't get good shots with a f2.8 lens. Everything I've done has been with a 2.8.

Here are some examples:
http://DiersPhotography.smugmug.com/gallery/3917639/1/227405583

I will be honest though...the gyms I've been in have pretty good light!

Daren
www.DiersPhotography.com

Shima

I've been shooting basketball with 70-200 f4/L presently... and really want to upgrade my lens to 70-200 f2.8/L... however have no money to do so. But even with that lens if you have a well lit gym you can still squeeze some cool shots out... granted my shots would be better w/ a faster lens (as there's still a decent amount of blur every now and then when it's just not fast enough), but you can make do. I really want the 70-200 2.8 because I love the versatility of that range. (plus it works well for other things, such as weddings)

My most recent basketball shoot (Dec 1, 2007)
http://shima.smugmug.com/gallery/3924784

jonh68

I would get a 50 1.8 or a 85 1.8. You can use bounce flash if it's allowed in the gym and it is sentive enough to pick up the light. This was taken with a nikon 85 1.8, sb800 bounced. Even if you can't use flash, you can still get great shots if you find the hot spots on the court.

Dbl

PineapplePhoto wrote:

What camera do you have? cropped sensor or full?

An 50mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8 will help you just fine.

f2.8 is WAY TOO SLOW for indoor basketball. Unless you have a 1D Mark III and you can shoot ISO 3200+

I shot around 30,000 basketball images last year alone with a 70-200/2.8 in some of the worst gyms you can imagine, so I would take exception to a 2.8 not being fast enough. Most gyms I shoot are 3200ISO f2.8, 1/400th or 1/320th shutter speed. I would rather shoot 3200ISO and get 1/400th than 1600ISO and lose a stop or two.

If I only had one lens to shoot it would be the 70-200/2.8. All of the following lenses in my bag get used for basketball at some point, the 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and a 28-75/2.8, 300/2.8. My favorite combination is the 70-200 on one body and the 300/2.8 on the other. I just finished a tournament this last weekend with this combination. The 70-200 accounted for about 80% of those shots.

My second most used lens after the above combo is the 28-75. Focus is not super fast but I love the wide views you get under the basket. The 50/1.8 will yield a lot of OOF shots, but for around $90 is not bad to have in the bag, though mine gets used very rarely. The 85/1.8 is an OK focusing lens, but if you own a 70-200/2.8 that you think is a bit long already I fail to see why you would want to own that lens unless you needed the low light capability.

I would think the best lens as a second is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L that you mentioned. Focus is reasonably fast, and this focal range is nice to use around the basket or just outside the key on the baseline. The 50 is way to hit and miss, the 85 a bit long. the 24-70 can be used for many other things than just sports. Good luck with your decision.

Here are a couple of examples with the 70-200/2.8. I would seriously look at using this lens again as a primary for basketball. All of these are 3200 ISO shots at 2.8 and 1/320s or 1/400s.








And one with the 28-75/2.8

Daren3006

Well I was all set to make a purchase this morning of the 24-70 2.8L when something else caught my eye. Just a few more reviews from you guys if you don't mind before I make a decision here.

What would you guys/gals think about a Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L ? Primarily for basketball and wrestling. Is anyone using this lens?

I realize the versatility is quite a bit less (depending on how you look at it), than the 24-70 but I am considering the fact that I'm using a 1.6X FOVC body.

Any last minute comments about the 35mm ??? I hope to have one of these two lenses in my hands by the end of the week!!



Thanks again,
Daren

Dbl

The 35/1.4 is a great low light lens, very nice color and contrast. If you already own a wide range of lenses this would be a nice specialty lens. Consider on your 1.6 crop camera this translates out to around 56mm in length. This will only be usable when shooting around the basket. If you are using two cameras I could see this on a second body.

It would work fairly well for wrestling as well as long as you are close to the mats. Keep in mind the DOF at 1.4 is razor thin. You will have a number of OOF shots. This is a really nice lens, just one that I would put more in a "I have everything, what now" category. Good luck again with your decision.

tedeb

I shoot college basketball, so I'm dealing with possibly a little more available light than say in high school gyms. My 70-200 f/2.8 IS L is my primary lens. I only have one body (a 30D), and I find if I shoot from the corners (where you'll find most photogs at a college hoops game) its great. If I shoot from underneath the basket, I'll take out my 28-70 f/2.8 L (better than the newer 24-70 some argue).

I'm posting basketball photos into my own thread right now if the OP (or anyone) is interested in seeing how this set-up works out.

KED

Dbl wrote:

And one with the 28-75/2.8

OK, am I the only one here who has no clue how you generated the effect with the ball? Some kind of PS image layering I presume? In any case, you must have a very fast camera.

Daren3006

Thanks everyone for your input....

I should have my 24-70 on Thursday!!!!!


Daren

ActionTroy

Dbl wrote:

I shot around 30,000 basketball images last year alone with a 70-200/2.8 in some of the worst gyms you can imagine, so I would take exception to a 2.8 not being fast enough. Most gyms I shoot are 3200ISO f2.8, 1/400th or 1/320th shutter speed. I would rather shoot 3200ISO and get 1/400th than 1600ISO and lose a stop or two.

If I only had one lens to shoot it would be the 70-200/2.8. All of the following lenses in my bag get used for basketball at some point, the 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and a 28-75/2.8, 300/2.8. My favorite combination is the 70-200 on one body and the 300/2.8 on the other. I just finished a tournament this last weekend with this combination. The 70-200 accounted for about 80% of those shots.

My second most used lens after the above combo is the 28-75. Focus is not super fast but I love the wide views you get under the basket. The 50/1.8 will yield a lot of OOF shots, but for around $90 is not bad to have in the bag, though mine gets used very rarely. The 85/1.8 is an OK focusing lens, but if you own a 70-200/2.8 that you think is a bit long already I fail to see why you would want to own that lens unless you needed the low light capability.

I would think the best lens as a second is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L that you mentioned. Focus is reasonably fast, and this focal range is nice to use around the basket or just outside the key on the baseline. The 50 is way to hit and miss, the 85 a bit long. the 24-70 can be used for many other things than just sports. Good luck with your decision.

Here are a couple of examples with the 70-200/2.8. I would seriously look at using this lens again as a primary for basketball. All of these are 3200 ISO shots at 2.8 and 1/320s or 1/400s.








And one with the 28-75/2.8

Great shoots, but I can tell already the lighting in those gyms are far superior to anything I see on a regular basis.