# Starting Sports Photography!



## jakobshooster (Sep 16, 2012)

I currently have a canon 60D with an 18-200mm sigma 1:3.5-6:3 II HSM, I am looking to start sports photography and I am wondering if that will be a good enough lens?  I am willing to spend around 1500$ on a new lens, I will most likely be on the side lines with a mono pod. Also would a 50mm lens do the trick? I do have one.


----------



## MLeeK (Sep 16, 2012)

Well, that all depends. If you care about sharpness I would get rid of that lens period. If you are shooting in the full light of day that lens will be fine, but if you are shooting in a gym or on a lighted field you can't shoot at 6.3. You'll NEED to be at f/2.8 in a lot of situations. 
If you are shooting in a GOOD gym you will be lucky and might be able to get by with f/4 at ISO 3200 or about there. If you are shooting in a crappy gym you'lll be at ISO 12800, f/2.8 and praying. On a GOOD Stadium field you will be at about ISO 2000 and f/4 and you MAY be able to use that lens. We're talking NFL lit stadium. Maybe. If you are on a typical GOOD football field you'll be at ISO 6400 f/4 if you are lucky. Any cheap football field at night you'll be at 12800 and f/2.8 AND pushing the limits of shutter speed in order to get that exposure. 
So...
You need an f/2.8 constant zoom. I shoot with the 70-200 f/2.8 OS from Sigma. It's not enough reach, but I do pretty well with it.


----------



## jakobshooster (Sep 16, 2012)

thanks  I'll look into that and i also have a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

I am also looking at these, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM and the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM one is half the price, would the 2.8 really be worth the 600-800$ more?


----------



## MLeeK (Sep 16, 2012)

YES. You will need the f/2.8. When I am LUCKY I can shoot under f/4, but not often for night or indoor sports. 
The 50 is essentially useless for sports. No reach what-so-ever and it's useless for group shots because it's too tight. 
Could you use just the regular old font and leave it alone? Thanks!


----------



## jakobshooster (Sep 16, 2012)

Sorry about the font, I am new to this website and was copying and pasting.  I have two more question, is the IS worth the extra cash? Also is this lens an okay lens to carry around without IS?


----------



## KmH (Sep 16, 2012)

In the upper right corner of the text editing box is A/A. Next time click on that, and you can the see and edit out the unwanted html code.

There are court sports and field sports. There is indoor sports and outdoor sports.

Court sport are usually played inside, and field sports are usually played outside.

_*It all boils down to making sure you have enough shutter speed to stop the sports action.*_

Indoor court sports and night time outdoor field sports almost always have insufficient, or barely enough lighting for photography, and require both fast lenses and cameras that have really good ISO performance. 

Daytime court and field sports usually have more than enough light and less expensive slower lenses and less expensive cameras with less ISO perfomance can be used.

Field sports require more telephoto reach than courts sports. To cover both near and far action, field sports focal length range basically needs to be from 24 mm or so to 400 mm or so.
To cover both near and far action, Court sports focal length range basically needs to be from 24 mm or so to 300 mm or so.

To cover that wide a range of focal lengths requires multiple lenses. However, there is insufficient time for changing lenses. So sports photographers usually use multiple camera bodies that have the needed lenses already mounted.

I shot sports using 3 bodies - 2 FX bodies (full frame) and 1 DX body (crop sensor).

For field sports I used a 24-85 mm f/2.8-4 lens, an 80-200 mm f/2.8 lens, and on the DX body a 200-400 mm f/4 lens.
For court sports I substituted the 200-400 mm f/4 with a 300 mm f/2.8 and the 300mm was mounted on a DX body.


----------



## fjrabon (Sep 16, 2012)

jakobshooster said:


> Sorry about the font, I am new to this website and was copying and pasting.  I have two more question, is the IS worth the extra cash? Also is this lens an okay lens to carry around without IS?



IS is completely pointless for sports.  You shoot at such high shutter speeds that camera shake (the only thing IS helps with) isn't an issue.


----------

