DILEMMA !!

[gsgary]

Well I have shot sports with what I have already, and the results were decently good, but I need reach and the speed of the 2.8 for indoor basketball

What sports have you shot @135mmF5.6 most sports i shoot i'm 200mm and above mostly at 300mm and 600mm

 

[inTempus]

Keep in mind that on a crop sensor the 200mm is really something like 320mm at full zoom.

I don't know if you will be able to keep your shutter speed high enough, even with f/2.8 to avoid blurry pictures with indoor lighting. The 3 stop advantage of a 70-200mm f/4 IS USM might be a better solution.

What do you guys think? I'm just speculating.

 

[Overread]

For sports most blur will not come from handshake but from motion blur from the subject - all the IS in the world can't counter motion blur (I know I have tried ). If you are shooting sports then your shutter speed would have to be fast enough to handhold without shake with a 200mm lens since you would be needing speeds that fast to freeze the motion of the players.

In that case the f2.8 has the advantage since it can use a wider max aperture (though its razor thin depth of field means its probably one you won't use that often for shooting) which lets it focus and provide a brighter viewfinder image - both very important things in lower light conditions often found indoors

 

[gsgary]

Keep in mind that on a crop sensor the 200mm is really something like 320mm at full zoom.

I don't know if you will be able to keep your shutter speed high enough, even with f/2.8 to avoid blurry pictures with indoor lighting. The 3 stop advantage of a 70-200mm f/4 IS USM might be a better solution.

What do you guys think? I'm just speculating.

Rubbish IS is no good for indoor sports you need big apertures F4 is no good, it's like banging your head against a wall

 

[inTempus]

Rubbish IS is no good for indoor sports you need big apertures F4 is no good, it's like banging your head against a wall

I asked a question, no need to be rude.

 

[inTempus]

For sports most blur will not come from handshake but from motion blur from the subject - all the IS in the world can't counter motion blur (I know I have tried ). If you are shooting sports then your shutter speed would have to be fast enough to handhold without shake with a 200mm lens since you would be needing speeds that fast to freeze the motion of the players.

In that case the f2.8 has the advantage since it can use a wider max aperture (though its razor thin depth of field means its probably one you won't use that often for shooting) which lets it focus and provide a brighter viewfinder image - both very important things in lower light conditions often found indoors

Gotcha. So for fast moving objects the brighter view is beneficial. You said that you probably wont shoot f/2.8 because of the extremely shallow depth of field. What aperture would you shoot at? One stop up, obviously, is f/4. So the real benefit is the brighter image in the view finder?

Sorry for the bone headed questions.

I have a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM on order that should be here tomorrow. I'm also thinking of getting a f/4 for a lighter "walking around" lens to complement it if I like the f/2.8 as much as I think I will.

 

[Ptyler22]

Ya well I think I might also try and get a flash for under $100 maybe a vivitar 285. So that should be bright enough for indoor. A few people on here shoot f2.8 wide open at ISO 3200 and for printing in the paper, you don't notice noise much at all, plus I could run them through noise reduction and get most of it out.

 

[Samanax]

You said that you probably wont shoot f/2.8 because of the extremely shallow depth of field.

You gotta remember that the DOF changes depending on the distance between the camera and the subject...the closer the subject is, the shallower the DOF will be...the farther the subject is, the deeper the DOF will be. You could shoot indoor sports wide open and still have a decent DOF since you're not right up to the players.

 

[gsgary]

Gotcha. So for fast moving objects the brighter view is beneficial. You said that you probably wont shoot f/2.8 because of the extremely shallow depth of field. What aperture would you shoot at? One stop up, obviously, is f/4. So the real benefit is the brighter image in the view finder?

Sorry for the bone headed questions.

I have a EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM on order that should be here tomorrow. I'm also thinking of getting a f/4 for a lighter "walking around" lens to complement it if I like the f/2.8 as much as I think I will.

Most of the time i have no choice but to shoot F2.8, here's 2 examples shot in the same hall
1
badly lit at the side of the hall so ISO3200 F2.8@ 300mm and only 1/320 which is about the minimum i like to shoot loosing DOF on the dog but i have no choice it's that or no shot

2
I move to another areana but in the same hall and it is totally different i stay at ISO3200 but now i can go to F4 and get 1/500 which is much better more depth of field and more chance of a sharp image because of DOF and higher shutter speed

 

[Overread]

agreed sometimes you have no choice.
The whole game is about compramise - you have to understand the light and the settings for what they will give you and then work out what downsides you don't want in your shot:

Do you raise ISO and get more noise
Do you open up the aperture and get a shallower depth of field
Do you lower the shutter speed and risk motion blur

Generally the only thing you can't get away with is motion blur 0 though it can look arty and work it has to be in the right place, not just used as a shotgun coverall method.

 

[Ptyler22]

I've been shooting indoor track in an awfully lit gym, it is soo dark. I played around with different shutters and stuff but I was generally 1/320, ISO 1600, and F 2.2 which is fast enough to only have a little blur on the runners hands and feet sometimes, but generally there was no blur. So I am used to shooting with low DOF and having only a couple keepers due to the tiny DOF, so that shouldn't be too much of a problem, I will just have to push the ISO to 3200. and in the gym at my school, it's a little brighter than the gym with the track, so I could probably get ISO 1600 and 1/320 at 2.8, maybe 1/400 at ISO 3200, and F3.2.

 

[Ptyler22]

Most of the time i have no choice but to shoot F2.8, here's 2 examples shot in the same hall
1
badly lit at the side of the hall so ISO3200 F2.8@ 300mm and only 1/320 which is about the minimum i like to shoot loosing DOF on the dog but i have no choice it's that or no shot

2
I move to another areana but in the same hall and it is totally different i stay at ISO3200 but now i can go to F4 and get 1/500 which is much better more depth of field and more chance of a sharp image because of DOF and higher shutter speed

Good shots. Wish I had a lens that would do F2.8 at 300mm. but hopefully soon I will have one that will do F2.8 at 200mm!!

 

[Overread]

Wish I had a lens that would do F2.8 at 300mm.

your not the only one

 

[gsgary]

Good shots. Wish I had a lens that would do F2.8 at 300mm. but hopefully soon I will have one that will do F2.8 at 200mm!!

Ive got the 200mmF2.8L it's a fantastic lens

 

[Ptyler22]

Ive got the 200mmF2.8L it's a fantastic lens

Yes I've heard it's the best buy of all the 200mm lenses, the 200mm F2.0 is only a smidge sharper and $4500 more. Not to mention the weight difference.