Need Lens for indoor GYM shooting (Action)

BLUEThunder

Hey Folks,
I am looking for a good lens for my Canon Rebel XTi for indoor VOLLEYBALL photography. Lighting in high school and college gyms that my daughter plays in is often poor.
I have been shooting with a Canon f3.5-5.6 18-55mm. This gives very poor results due almost entirely to lack of adequate light. I shoot in the P, Tv or Av modes playing with settings but never have good results.
I was thinking about getting the Canon f2.8 24-70mm lens. Is this a good alternative? I have seen one guy at the gym using one of these with results that are pretty good....at least he says so. And from what I see on his camera display they look pretty good.
All of my shots are 1) Dark and 2) Anything moving is blurred.
His shots were much lighter and you could read the lettering on the ball.

I guess my question is, before I lay out $1K on that lens is there any other lenses I should consider? I like the Zoom range on the lens I mentioned. I considered a f2.8 70-200mm but that would not be good for taking team pics after the games.

Any help you guys could give is much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

TaDa

I will chime in with my 2 cents. Since you're shooting in low light, I believe that f/2.8 is your best option. I have been looking for a regular zoom in that range and just bought the 24-70L, but am yet to shoot with it. I am replacing my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 with it, but I must say that I LOVE the Tammy. Great optics for a lens in this price point ($350ish). For me, it hunts at times when I'm trying to shoot my son in my poorly lit living room. I'm guessing that any gym would be better lit than my living room, so this might be an option for you on the cheap end of the range. You've stated that you do not think that the 70-200 would be good for portraits of the team, but the 70 side of that lens should do okay for portraits if you backed up just a little. Everyone RAVES about the 70-200 2.8 IS. This, of course, is now on the high end of the price range at around $1500. There are a bunch of options in between. The 70-200 2.8 non-IS (1k), the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS (1k) and a new option for you of a lens that has gotten pretty decent reviews and is about to be released by Canon in the USA, the 55-250 IS USM ($300). But since you stated that your shots are coming out too dark, not blurry, I'm thinking the 55-250 may not work for you since it goes from f/4 to f/5.6, even though it has the Image Stabilization.

ziggy53

Welcome to the Digital Grin BLUEThunder.

You might be able to use your existing "kit" lens for the team shots if you add an external flash, which I highly recommend. I also recommend a simple light modifier, probably a scoop type since the gym likely has high ceilings.

http://www.fototime.com/inv/908195739C4C0D3

A Canon EF 70-200mm, f2.8L might be suitable, but you will still wind up shooting wide open and ISO 1600 in order to get the shutter speeds close to what you need. This lens would probably be your best bet if you have to work from the bleachers

You might also look at the Canon EF 135mm, f2L for tight shots and the EF 85mm, f1.8 for shots with multiple players. These would be best if you can work courtside.

BTW, the way the sports magazines handle this is to use studio monolights, positioned in the corners of the gym and fired by slave at the ceiling. It requires permission from the hosts and, obviously, serious preparation (not to mention cost).

BLUEThunder

Thanks! Any more ideas?
Hey Ziggy and TaDa,
Thanks for the welcome Ziggy and thanks to both of you for the advice!

I am really tempted to go for the f2.8 70-200 . Simply cause in a lot of gyms I cannot get court side. My only hang up with the bigger zoom lens is the team portraits after a game....but as TaDa said, I guess at the 70mm end and if I back up a bit maybe I can make it work.

I have thought about the additional flash too. The only thing is they are EXPENSIVE and I don't know which one I should get. Any suggestions there? The bigger flash would come in handy in a lot of other situations too.

This appears to be a REALLY cool forum! I'm glad to have found it....I am also a member of another that looks JUST LIKE this one....it's called ADVrider. It's an adventure motorcycle riding forum. They must use exactly the same forum software stuff that this site does???

ziggy53

BLUEThunder wrote:

...

I have thought about the additional flash too. The only thing is they are EXPENSIVE and I don't know which one I should get. Any suggestions there? The bigger flash would come in handy in a lot of other situations too.

This appears to be a REALLY cool forum! I'm glad to have found it....I am also a member of another that looks JUST LIKE this one....it's called ADVrider. It's an adventure motorcycle riding forum. They must use exactly the same forum software stuff that this site does???

I have the Sigma EF-500 DG Super E-TTL and I really like it. It's not as convenient or as durable as the Canon 580EX, for instance, but it has similar features and costs about 60% as much.

If you want a decent flash that doesn't break the bank, the Sunpak 383 Super is a nice "auto" flash that works pretty well with modern cameras. It can also be used as a manual flash, which is more valuable than it might seem. It also makes a pretty good slaved flash later on as you expand your kit.

ADVrider is a sister site, owned and operated by the folks that own SmugMug. They are also knowledgable about photography however, and a great bunch. (You will probably see a few other of the ADVrider names here as well.)

Manfr3d

I found the 70-200/2.8 to be too slow for some indoor sports
even at ISO1600. But it realy depends on the light. Many
people swear by the 50/1.4 the 85mm/1.8 and the 135mm/2.0
for indoor sports. Just a consideration, a 1.8 lens will provide
faster and more accurate focusing, also a 85mm/1.8 is less than
400€ whereas the 70-200/2.8 is at least 1200€.

I personaly use the 70-200mm/2.8 L non-IS which wins in the
versality department and also a 50mm/1.4. Very often I end
up shooting at ISO3200 (still good enough for web display)
with the 70-200 at f2.8. The 50mm allows me to freeze action
at ISO1600. I only wish the 50 was a 85 or 100mm lens for
more reach I guess sooner or later people who photograph
sports as end up with a 2.8 zoom and one or two primes.

henryp

BLUEThunder wrote:

Hey Folks,
I am looking for a good lens for my Canon Rebel XTi for indoor VOLLEYBALL photography. Lighting in high school and college gyms that my daughter plays in is often poor.

I shot high school & college sports professionally for years. Too often gym lighting is woefully inadequate and even when there's sufficient quantity, the quality is dismal, lacking specularity and contrast.

Your simplest solution would be a Canon 430EX or its pricier big sib, the 580 EXII. These will integrate completely with your XTi.

BLUEThunder

henryp wrote:

simplest solution would be a Canon 430EX or its pricier big sib, the 580 EXII. These will integrate completely with your XTi.

I like your idea and appreciate the link. However, I have a couple of questions about flashes.

1) My daughter is an outside hitter (volleyball) and consequentley she sees a lot of action. I often shoot multiple frames per second to get that "perfect" shot. Isn't even one of these good flashes gonna be to slow recycling to adequately light the following 3-4 frames after the initial shot? Looking at the 430EX specs it looked like that flash has a 2 second recycle time. If you are shooting ~3 frames/sec how is this going to work?

2) What kind of distance is this flash good for? ie. if I'm in the bleachers shooting with my 70-300mm is this flash going to be adequate?

3) If you have favorable answers to my questions, suggesting the flash is the answer, is that bright of a flash going to be distracting to the players or referee's?

Thanks again for all of your wonderful suggestions.

BLUEThunder

Manfr3d wrote:

I found the 70-200/2.8 to be too slow for some indoor sports
even at ISO1600. But it realy depends on the light. Many
people swear by the 50/1.4 the 85mm/1.8 and the 135mm/2.0
for indoor sports. Just a consideration, a 1.8 lens will provide
faster and more accurate focusing, also a 85mm/1.8 is less than
400€ whereas the 70-200/2.8 is at least 1200€.

I personaly use the 70-200mm/2.8 L non-IS which wins in the
versality department and also a 50mm/1.4. Very often I end
up shooting at ISO3200 (still good enough for web display)
with the 70-200 at f2.8. The 50mm allows me to freeze action
at ISO1600. I only wish the 50 was a 85 or 100mm lens for
more reach I guess sooner or later people who photograph
sports as end up with a 2.8 zoom and one or two primes.

Man, this is great! You guys are giving me so much good stuff to think about. I love forums.

Thanks!

TaDa

BLUEThunder wrote:

I like your idea and appreciate the link. However, I have a couple of questions about flashes.

1) My daughter is an outside hitter (volleyball) and consequentley she sees a lot of action. I often shoot multiple frames per second to get that "perfect" shot. Isn't even one of these good flashes gonna be to slow recycling to adequately light the following 3-4 frames after the initial shot? Looking at the 430EX specs it looked like that flash has a 2 second recycle time. If you are shooting ~3 frames/sec how is this going to work?

2) What kind of distance is this flash good for? ie. if I'm in the bleachers shooting with my 70-300mm is this flash going to be adequate?

3) If you have favorable answers to my questions, suggesting the flash is the answer, is that bright of a flash going to be distracting to the players or referee's?

Thanks again for all of your wonderful suggestions.

I can't believe that I didn't recommend a flash in my first post, so at least I can contribute here. My 580ex fires repeatedly with mutple frame shooting. It will simply stop firing when it needs to recycle, but it's an EXTREMELY powerful flash. Mine is rated to use E-TTL out to 135mm, so it will sense what distance your lens is set to up to 135mm and zoom out. That being said, if you're shooting someone at 150mm, the light is still going to light them up, it just won't be using the flashes zoom beyond 135.

SaltFork

More input...

BLUEThunder wrote:

I guess my question is, before I lay out $1K on that lens is there any other lenses I should consider? I like the Zoom range on the lens I mentioned. I considered a f2.8 70-200mm but that would not be good for taking team pics after the games.

Blue - I shoot high school volleyball with a Canon 40D which recently replaced a Digital Rebel. I shoot with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS and the Canon 85 f/1.8 - all without flash.

Most of the gyms I shoot in require the additional light of the 85 f/1.8. The problem is that you are giving up a lot of depth of field when wide open. One of the things I like to do is set up beyond the corner of the court behind the opposing team and shoot the hitters through the net. It lets me get their faces and expressions and sometimes I'm even able to pre-focus on where they will be and then turn the AF off so that I don't miss a shot if the camera wants to start searching. You can mitigate some of your DOF issues by setting up so that your subjects are closer to the same plane. Directly behind the center of the opposing team is great for that.

Here's a link to a cropped shot I took this way with my Digital Rebel last year. http://www.saltforkimages.com/gallery/3310149_Bvnq2#184088671

Check out the Canon 85mm f/1.8. It also makes a great portrait lens!

Good Luck!

James

Tango

just a side note...everyone but the photographer hates flash at any sport...
if a photog was firing off multi flash at my kids events it better only be when the opposing team is shooting or hitting...
i would sure hate to have my kids team distracted....

btw, IMO you will never get good shots from the stands or across court...
unless you have a 400mm 2.8... (besides low light at distance the angle alone would be cause for that statment)

search the sports threads for shooting tips in gyms...

claudermilk

I don't shoot sprts, but I do shoot theater/dance and it seems the two have similar problems (low-light, fast action). I have both the 24-70/2.8L and 70-200/2.8L and they are workhorses for this kind of subject. You just pick the focal range that fits the distance you usually find youself at. Part of the reason for selecting the expensive, fast glass is to avoid using flash; as Aaron pointed out, only the photographer will be happy with strobes popping off. While it's more expensive, you are probably better off overall working with the available light as constant flashes annoy the audience & performers/athletes.

henryp

SaltFork wrote:

Blue - I shoot high school volleyball with a Canon 40D which recently replaced a Digital Rebel. I shoot with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS and the Canon 85 f/1.8 - all without flash.

Most of the gyms I shoot in require the additional light of the 85 f/1.8. The problem is that you are giving up a lot of depth of field when wide open.

The other concern, and this varies from gym to gym and depends in part on whether there are windows and if so whether you're shooting in the afternoon or after sundown, is ending up with a shutter speed too slow to freeze the players in mid-action. Motion blur can be a creative way to imply the game's pace and excitement, but sharp, clear images are nice too.

henryp

BLUEThunder wrote:

I like your idea and appreciate the link. However, I have a couple of questions about flashes.

1) My daughter is an outside hitter (volleyball) and consequentley she sees a lot of action. I often shoot multiple frames per second to get that "perfect" shot. Isn't even one of these good flashes gonna be to slow recycling to adequately light the following 3-4 frames after the initial shot? Looking at the 430EX specs it looked like that flash has a 2 second recycle time. If you are shooting ~3 frames/sec how is this going to work?

The 2-sec recycle time is if you're shooting in the flash's manual mode and the flash is producing a full-power pop at every flash. More often than not, the flash is producing just the amount needed for the shot and saving the rest. You'll often be able to get off multi-frame bursts with no problem. If you do need instant-recycle time, the addition of a small Quantum battery is the optimal solution.

I should also point out that quantity is no substitute for quality. Sports shooters brought home great images long before motor-drives made 3+fps the norm. Shooting smarter is better than shooting more, even in the digial age.

2) What kind of distance is this flash good for? ie. if I'm in the bleachers shooting with my 70-300mm is this flash going to be adequate?

There's almost no way to get anything really meaningful from the bleachers no matter what equipment you buy. That's why pros don't hang out there. Unless your daughter's playing the NCAA finals, with permission from both coaches and the ref you ought to be able to shoot from the same vantage I'd have selected were I covering the game professionally as long as you maintain the same professional comportment.

3) If you have favorable answers to my questions, suggesting the flash is the answer, is that bright of a flash going to be distracting to the players or referee's?

I shot high school & college sports full time for 20+ years and used on-camera flash 90+% of the time. The only routine exceptions were gymnastics and the diving portion of swim meets. I've never had a complaint from a player or ref and the only complaints I ever got from coaches was when their team was away & losing.

Tango

henryp wrote:

I shot high school & college sports full time for 20+ years and used on-camera flash 90+% of the time. The only routine exceptions were gymnastics and the diving portion of swim meets. I've never had a complaint from a player or ref and the only complaints I ever got from coaches was when their team was away & losing.

i wouldnt be surprised if a teenager or a ref never gave you a complaint,
a teenager thinks they will be made a star by your pics...and a ref just dont care about you,they have their own worries....
but i guarantee many many many 20+ yrs worth of parents wanted to.
(winning or losing...)

but on the flipside, that same parent wants pictures of their kid looking just like the players in the magazines

BLUEThunder

SaltFork wrote:

Most of the gyms I shoot in require the additional light of the 85 f/1.8.

sometimes I'm even able to pre-focus on where they will be and then turn the AF off so that I don't miss a shot if the camera wants to start searching.

Check out the Canon 85mm f/1.8. It also makes a great portrait lens!

AWESOME, AWESOME!!! Thanks to all of you guys! I really think I'm getting some good advice here and really appreciate it all!

Question on the 85mm lens. Do you find that this fixed length gives you adequate closeness when say, you are center court opposite side from hitter? I don't have any experience with fixed focal lenght lenses.

Now that I think about it when I am courtside....opposite the hitter (ie. ~35' away) I usually have my 18-55mm zoomed ALL the way in....It is somewhere around 80mm since it's being used on a digital rather than a SLR...correct? So, yeah, what I'm thinking is that the fixed 85mm might be about perfect???

I do the prefocus thing a lot. I do that at the v'ball court because as an Outside Hitter she is always at the same place on the net (roughly) and I also use this method at the MX track when catching someone coming over a jump. U always know where they are coming over and since they are going so fast often be the time the camera focus' they are gone. So, yeah, prefocus helps a lot.

I guess the fixed 85mm f1.8 is a lot cheaper than the variable zoom f2.8 huh?

BLUEThunder

AaronNelson wrote:

just a side note...everyone but the photographer hates flash at any sport...
if a photog was firing off multi flash at my kids events it better only be when the opposing team is shooting or hitting...
i would sure hate to have my kids team distracted....

btw, IMO you will never get good shots from the stands or across court...
unless you have a 400mm 2.8... (besides low light at distance the angle alone would be cause for that statment)

search the sports threads for shooting tips in gyms...

All good points! And I agree, the best shots I have gotten have all came from being courtside. Thanks for the advice!

BLUEThunder

SaltFork wrote:

Here's a link to a cropped shot I took this way with my Digital Rebel last year. http://www.saltforkimages.com/gallery/3310149_Bvnq2#184088671

Oh, BTW SaltFork, GOOD PICS! I like the work. Were most of these with the 85mm fixed?

BLUEThunder

TaDa wrote:

Mine is rated to use E-TTL out to 135mm, so it will sense what distance your lens is set to up to 135mm and zoom out. That being said, if you're shooting someone at 150mm, the light is still going to light them up, it just won't be using the flashes zoom beyond 135.

I hear ya but unfortunately I can't say that I technically understand ya... I am new to some of the lingo associated with the flash like E-TTL.
Also, I don't understand how the flash functions based on different lens settings?

Sorry, I'm still a learnin' here....

But, again, I thank ALL of you for ALL of you great input. I am following the rest of it.

SaltFork

BLUEThunder wrote:

Oh, BTW SaltFork, GOOD PICS! I like the work. Were most of these with the 85mm fixed?

Thanks!

Yes, most of them were with the 85. I shot a few times with the 70-200 and just didn't feel like I needed the extra length - but I definitely needed the extra f-stops. You can click on the PHoto Information on most of the shots to see all the EXIF data including focal length.

Nowadays I shoot with my 40D at 3200 ISO to get the additional shutterspeed I want and I enable the High ISO Noise Reduction function in the camera. I like the results much better than what I used to get at ISO 1600 on the Digital Rebel. Here's a link to some recent basketball shots I made that way: http://www.saltforkimages.com/gallery/4344685_qceAe#254901013

Good luck!

TaDa

BLUEThunder wrote:

I hear ya but unfortunately I can't say that I technically understand ya... I am new to some of the lingo associated with the flash like E-TTL.
Also, I don't understand how the flash functions based on different lens settings?

Sorry, I'm still a learnin' here....

But, again, I thank ALL of you for ALL of you great input. I am following the rest of it.

E-TTL is essentially a light metering algorithm that lets the lens and flash speak to each other. Let's use a 24-70mm lens as an example, with the 580ex flash. When you enable E-TTL mode on the flash, the lens and the flash start talking to each other for automatic flash metering. What will happen is this: You have the lens at 24mm and set to f/2.8. The flash will now know that you're focusing on something at 24mm and you have your lens wide open at 2.8. It will then meter the light at the center of that 24mm range, and adjust the light output of the flash accordingly. Same thing if you then move the focal point to 50mm, 70mm, etc and/or change your aperture. You change your focal length and you will hear the flash adjusting accordingly. Look at the LCD display on the back of the flash, and you will see the focal length in the top right of the window (24, 30, 50, 70mm, etc.) as well as the aperture that your lens is set to. Essentially, E-TTL tries to produce the perfect amount of light for the focal length/aperture that your lens is set to.

I picked up the 580ex used for $250 mainly on Ziggy's advice and you cannot believe how happy I am with it now that I know how to use it correctly. When I first got the flash, I just enabled E-TTL and tried it with my 50mm 1.4 lens. For some of the shots, the flash was putting out too much light, so I was able to play around with the settings on it and stop down the amount of light that it puts out (there is a dial on the back of the flash that lets you change light output from -3 to +3, 0 being default. You crank the dial down to negative three, and you are reducing the light output by essentially 3 stops. If your flash weren't putting out enough light on certain shots, you could do the exact opposite and increase the light output by 3 stops, etc. It is really a killer flash.

ziggy53

henryp wrote:

...

I shot high school & college sports full time for 20+ years and used on-camera flash 90+% of the time. The only routine exceptions were gymnastics and the diving portion of swim meets. I've never had a complaint from a player or ref and the only complaints I ever got from coaches was when their team was away & losing.

Where I live, a small town in northern Illinois, if there is a complaint from either coach you are asked to stop with flash photography by the refs. Nevermind that every other parent with a digicam and direct flash is able to keep shooting.

ziggy53

TaDa wrote:

E-TTL is essentially a light metering algorithm that lets the lens and flash speak to each other. Let's use a 24-70mm lens as an example, with the 580ex flash. When you enable E-TTL mode on the flash, the lens and the flash start talking to each other for automatic flash metering. What will happen is this: You have the lens at 24mm and set to f/2.8. The flash will now know that you're focusing on something at 24mm and you have your lens wide open at 2.8. It will then meter the light at the center of that 24mm range, and adjust the light output of the flash accordingly. Same thing if you then move the focal point to 50mm, 70mm, etc and/or change your aperture. You change your focal length and you will hear the flash adjusting accordingly. Look at the LCD display on the back of the flash, and you will see the focal length in the top right of the window (24, 30, 50, 70mm, etc.) as well as the aperture that your lens is set to. Essentially, E-TTL tries to produce the perfect amount of light for the focal length/aperture that your lens is set to.

I picked up the 580ex used for $250 mainly on Ziggy's advice and you cannot believe how happy I am with it now that I know how to use it correctly. When I first got the flash, I just enabled E-TTL and tried it with my 50mm 1.4 lens. For some of the shots, the flash was putting out too much light, so I was able to play around with the settings on it and stop down the amount of light that it puts out (there is a dial on the back of the flash that lets you change light output from -3 to +3, 0 being default. You crank the dial down to negative three, and you are reducing the light output by essentially 3 stops. If your flash weren't putting out enough light on certain shots, you could do the exact opposite and increase the light output by 3 stops, etc. It is really a killer flash.

Minor correction here:

Canon E-TTL II is a fairly advanced flash system which uses focus distance information from the lens "when available" and when the flash is pointed directly at the subject.

Some lenses do not provide distance information to the camera, so the flash exposure system reverts to E-TTL, which does try to compensate for anomalies like highly reflective backgrounds.

Likewise, if the flash is adjusted to a bounce position, the distance information is no longer pertinent, so the flash reverts to E-TTL operation.

An older list of Canon lenses which provide distance information is here:

http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/#distancedata

TaDa

ziggy53 wrote:

Minor correction here:

Canon E-TTL II is a fairly advanced flash system which uses focus distance information from the lens "when available" and when the flash is pointed directly at the subject.

Some lenses do not provide distance information to the camera, so the flash exposure system reverts to E-TTL, which does try to compensate for anomalies like highly reflective backgrounds.

Likewise, if the flash is adjusted to a bounce position, the distance information is no longer pertinent, so the flash reverts to E-TTL operation.

An older list of Canon lenses which provide distance information is here:

http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/#distancedata

Wow, if that's the only correction coming from Ziggy, I feel like I just passed the Bar exam. WOOOT! clapclap

SavedByZero

BLUEThunder wrote:

I have thought about the additional flash too. The only thing is they are EXPENSIVE and I don't know which one I should get. Any suggestions there? The bigger flash would come in handy in a lot of other situations too.

Most schools/teams won't let you use a flash court side for most indoor sports at it blinds the athelets when they need to keep their eye on the ball. Just shoot at 1600-3200 with a F2.8 lens and work on your technique.

jonh68

You need a 1.8 lens and a flash.

The 1.8 will get you great pictures in decent light without flash. When you don't have decent light, you can use the flash and bounce it off the ceiling or the back wall. If the lighting is good, you can combine the 1.8 and the flash and use ISO of 400-800 with a 1/500 second exposure. Shooting in manual mode is most useful. For more advice, go to the sports section and you will get tons of advice from shooters who specialize in sports

Different areas have different rules on flash, but I have not had a complaint. Coaches WILL let you know if it's a distraction. I shoot sports for newspapers and I have done it in two states so I haven't run into a problem. Just ask to make sure. Yes players and parents and coaches want their players to look good, but they also want to win.

Here's some shots that were bounced of the ceiling and the back wall of a basketball game.





Volleyball with bounce lighting.

BLUEThunder

jonh68 wrote:

You need a 1.8 lens and a flash.

The 1.8 will get you great pictures in decent light without flash. When you don't have decent light, you can use the flash and bounce it off the ceiling or the back wall. If the lighting is good, you can combine the 1.8 and the flash and use ISO of 400-800 with a 1/500 second exposure. Shooting in manual mode is most useful. For more advice, go to the sports section and you will get tons of advice from shooters who specialize in sports

I loved your pics! They are really bright and clear. So, do you think I can get similar results with a Rebel XTi, an 85mm f1.8 and a good flash?

What lens were you using in the shots you posted?

ziggy53

BLUEThunder wrote:

I loved your pics! They are really bright and clear. So, do you think I can get similar results with a Rebel XTi, an 85mm f1.8 and a good flash?

What lens were you using in the shots you posted?

Understand that John68 is using a Nikon D50, which allows a flash sync to 1/500th. The Canon XTi maximum flash sync is 1/200th unless you use HSS/FP mode which has the effect of also reducing the maximum power of the flash somewhat. HSS/FP is also limited to a very few compatible flash units, so ask before you purchase.

Yes, flash can help if bounced and is much less noticeable to the players. You do want to be considerate of spectators if bouncing backward. I would use ISO 1600 with the XTi and use noise reduction software to help in post.

jonh68

BLUEThunder wrote:

I loved your pics! They are really bright and clear. So, do you think I can get similar results with a Rebel XTi, an 85mm f1.8 and a good flash?

What lens were you using in the shots you posted?

I was using the 85 1.8. Occasionally, I will use the 80-200 2.8, but it depends on the lighting. You could also use a 50 1.8 which is cheaper, but you would have to get closer. There are times I wish I had a 50 1.8.

The only time you could bounce backwards is when you are in front of a wall. If you are in the stands, your best bet is bouncing off the ceiling. I know the ceiling are pretty high, but there are reflective materials and all you want is some more light for the 1.8 to pick up. WB settings are very tricky so you may want to do a manual WB setting.

As Ziggy said, your limit of 1/200 may be a problem on very fast action, but it may also help you because you could probably get away with lower ISO. If you are thinking of getting a lens specifically for indoor sports, the 50 or 85 1.8 would be my choice. You are not going to get fast focus, but what you do get will be sharp and it will give you the ability to shoot without a flash as well. You can get good results with a 70-200 2.8 as well, but I wouldn't spend the money on a something in the 20-70 2.8 range just for inside sports. A 50 1.8 will run you around $100 and the 85 mm 1.8 is around 300-400 if you get a used one. Then, you could get a 70-200 2.8 which would be helpful when you get the knack for shooting indoors and want faster focus. At the time, I couldn't afford a 70-200 or even a 80-200 2.8, so I bought the 85 1.8. It has been my workhorse for low light and I have even used it for football games for action close to the sidelines. Plus, the the lens is small.

You could use your current lens for team pics and the flash would be very handy for that, and you could probably bounce that as well.

BLUEThunder

Thanks!
You guys have all been SO helpful! I thank each of you for your input.

I took someones advice and went to the Sports Threads last night and did a search on V'ball. I got a whole page of threads dedicated to just photographing that sport. What I found was an overwhelming opinion...It's:
a) one of the hardest sports to shoot.
b) lighting is poor across america in high school level gyms and below.
c) the most common equipment used throughout all of the shoots was the 85mm f1.8 lens and often a good flash.

So, I think that's what I'm shopping for. The combination of the two is still cheaper than one 24-70mm f2.8 lens.....

Next question, who is a good online retailer of equipment that has a good reputation and GOOD prices?

Thanks all. The daughter has a tournament in two weeks and I would like to get geared up before that one so I can play around more!

What an awesome forumn!