Is f/4 is Enough?

Buszaj · Sep 24, 2007

Hi everyone,
My P&S is in repair and it may not be worth fixing it so I might have the chance to get a dSLR. The Canon 70-200f/4L, I would like to maybe pick this one up for sports. Will and aperture of 4 be enough for shooting various sports on nice clear days, slightly overcast ones, and in well lit large gymnasiums?

Thanks a lot

Keagle · Sep 24, 2007

Yup - I'm gonna get this lens too. The key you said is nice clear days/well lit - which means you can use a high shutter speed anyway. It's meant to be a really nice lens, and it's Canon's cheapest L.

Big Mike · Sep 24, 2007

Clear sunny days...probably...but F2.8 would be better.
In any gym that I have seen...no, probably not...F2.8 is definitely better.

The F4 version is a great lens, one of the sharpest you can get...and if that's all you can afford, then that's a good choice. However, you will find yourself in situations where you will be wishing that you had the F2.8 lens...and the IS version.

JIP · Sep 24, 2007

I would have to say if you can afford it the 2.8 is worth puuuuuusssshhhing your budget to get. I have to go one step further than Mike here and say as far as a gym a 2.8 is almost a requirement to get excellent shots. Lighting in a gym is extremely poor in gyms (as I am sure you know) and anything shory of a 2.8 you will be lacking or have to really push your ISO. So again I would go out of my way to get the 2.8 if it is a possibility I say go for it you will not regret it.

usayit · Sep 24, 2007

Other things to consider..

* f/4 version is far easier to pack; lighter and more compact
* f/4 version's cost... money that could be spent elsewhere.
* Shooting at f/2.8 wil mean a decreased DOF. Subject aperture versus story telling...
* There are good options available from Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina. (esp sigma).

I sold mine because I found that the f/4 zooms (24-105 f4L and 100-400mm L) are better suited for my travels on foot and f/4 good enough for most of the shooting I do. In the case of my 100-400mm, the extra focal length was more useful. If I expect to shoot in low light, I'm happier shooting with primes which will outperform equivalent zooms in almost all categories.

So in most your cases you specified, you will be fine with f/4 with the exception of the gym. In that situtation, you can increase ISO or shoot at a faster aperture. Its up to you to determine which is best suited for your tastes.

Funny Mike... there many times I was shooting with my 70-200mm f2.8L IS that I wish I had 1.4 or 1.8... hence my move to fast primes.

jstuedle · Sep 24, 2007

If you absolutely HAVE to get the f4, work on a couple of off camera flashes and pocket wizards for gyms. As well as they can be lit, almost always not bright enough for less than a 2.8 and sometimes not even then. One or two hot-shoe flashes over and behind each goal and they can turn the lights off and everything is bright and sharp as long as you do your part.

table1349 · Sep 24, 2007

jstuedle said:
If you absolutely HAVE to get the f4, work on a couple of off camera flashes and pocket wizards for gyms. As well as they can be lit, almost always not bright enough for less than a 2.8 and sometimes not even then. One or two hot-shoe flashes over and behind each goal and they can turn the lights off and everything is bright and sharp as long as you do your part.

Before going this route, the OP needs to see if it is allowed. Many indoor sporting events do not allow flash to be used as it is a distraction to the players. Waste of money to buy $500-$1000.00 worth of flashes and pocket wizards, not to be able to use them. Plus that money could go towards the f.2.8.

Keith Gebhardt · Sep 24, 2007

depends also on the lighting conditions. f/4 is good for daytime, maybe some strong overcast.

but night shots, even in an arena or indoor stadium.. youll want f/2.8 at least. you can get away with 3.5 with high iso somtimes. but images arnt as crisp.

JIP · Sep 24, 2007

usayit said:
Other things to consider..

* f/4 version's cost... money that could be spent elsewhere.
* Shooting at f/2.8 wil mean a decreased DOF. Subject aperture versus story telling...
.

I am going to assume you know this but just because you have a 2.8 lens doesn't mean you have to shoot at 2.8 to get the full value of the lens. In fact if you never shoot a 2.8 lens at 2.8 you are still getting the full advantages of a 2.8 lens.

usayit · Sep 24, 2007

double post

usayit · Sep 24, 2007

JIP said:
I am going to assume you know this but just because you have a 2.8 lens doesn't mean you have to shoot at 2.8 to get the full value of the lens. In fact if you never shoot a 2.8 lens at 2.8 you are still getting the full advantages of a 2.8 lens.

yes.. of course I know.

How many stops between f/2.8 and f/4?

There is more than one way to obtain a decent photo in a tough low light situation... I am mearly stating that opening to f/2.8 is not always the best solution. Again.. subject versus story.

I'd argue that if you never shoot at f/2.8 you would be better off with the f/4 lens. Easier to handhold, pack and lower cost. The 70-200mm f/4 is known for sharpness all throughout even at f/4.. some would argue even sharper than the f/2.8 @ f/4.

Now if you consider the Sigma... the cost difference is not so big.

MikeR · Sep 24, 2007

I shoot both indoor and outdoor high school sports. f/4 will not be suffecient in most gyms. I shoot with the f/2.8 version and sometimes have a problem in gyms. Even outdoors you have to remember that your shutter speed will need to be fast enough to freeze the motion and as you raise the ISO you risk noise.

Jon, The Elder · Sep 25, 2007

Will and aperture of 4 be enough for shooting various sports on nice clear days, slightly overcast ones, and in well lit large gymnasiums?

And therein lies your problem. I have yet to see a gym on the school level that the camera considers as 'well lit'.

All of the previous responders have offered advice as to lens choice and use of flash (if permitted).

Whatever your decision, you will be pushing something to its extreme (camera,lens,flash,etc). Your gear choice being limited by available funds, you are going to make some real compromises.

If you shoot in RAW and use your software, you can correct a certain amount of noise and color problems. The "biggy" is freezing the action.

Learn what options your computer opens up for you in PP as this can help a whole lot in final output of the image.

How many stops between f/2.8 and f/4?

On mine....2 f3.2 and f3.5

At a focal length of 150mm and distance of 50'
DOF @ f2.8=3.6'
DOF@ f3.2=4.05'
DOF@ f4=5.11'

Question is, is that enough for you and at what shutter speed.

WDodd · Sep 25, 2007

How many stops between f/2.8 and f/4?

Thats actually only one stop. f/3.2 and 3.5 are fractions of a stop.

Jon, The Elder · Sep 25, 2007

Please don't nit pick. the guy needs to understand the entire problem. The main point being that there are other options besides lens Brands and how fast they are.