Need a good lens for friday night football

[tia81280]

Please help!! I own a Nikon D5000 and I would like to take great pics of my twin sons playing Varisty football in a few weeks. I can't afford the $2500 70-200mm lens, even though I would *love* to have it, because that is the type of photo I am going for.

I could possibly talk my husband into agreeing to up to $1200 or so total if it proved to be worth it. What can i use to get great quality photos and do I need a flash? I don't currently own one.

Thank you in advance!

 

[goodguy]

For 1200$
Thats roughly what you can get the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8
Excellent lens

 

[ruifo]

The "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD" is an excelent option.
Optically better than the Nikon sister, and around $1,500 new. You can find it on eBay for around $1,100.

Here some reviews:
- Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon on Nikon D5000 versus Nikkor AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II on Nikon D5000 - Side by side lens comparison - DxOMark
- http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...mron-70-200mm-f-2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-opinion.html

My shots with the "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD":
- https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157641188279093/

 

[robbins.photo]

Please help!! I own a Nikon D5000 and I would like to take great pics of my twin sons playing Varisty football in a few weeks. I can't afford the $2500 70-200mm lens, even though I would *love* to have it, because that is the type of photo I am going for.

I could possibly talk my husband into agreeing to up to $1200 or so total if it proved to be worth it. What can i use to get great quality photos and do I need a flash? I don't currently own one.

Thank you in advance!

Sigma 70-200 mm OS HSM, outstanding lens. I shoot with mine a ton, been extremely happy with it.

I've also heard a lot of very positive things about the Tamron 70-200 mm VC, both should be in that price range.

 

[Derrel]

The "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD" is an excelent option.
Optically better than the Nikon sister, and around $1,500 new. You can find it on eBay for around $1,100.

Here some reviews:
- Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon on Nikon D5000 versus Nikkor AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II on Nikon D5000 - Side by side lens comparison - DxOMark
- http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...mron-70-200mm-f-2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-opinion.html

My shots with the "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD":
- https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157641188279093/

I cannot understand how you make the claim the Tamron is "better than" the Nikon offering. The Tamron and the Nikon both score a "16" on the DxO Mark scale, and both lenses rate "9 MP" in resolving ability, but the Tamron has greater vignetting, and 33% worse chromatic aberration. The two lenses are equal on distortion. I do not see how the Tamron is "better" is any meaningful way, whatsoever, but it is less expensive, and it will lose much more resale value than any Nikkor lens.

Night football from the stands? Photos are not going to be very good even with a 70-200/2.8. Maybe you can get down on the sidelines with an 85/1.8, a truly FAST lens, and maybe get some frames in-focus, ones you can crop-in on later. Night football under the lights is not just a buy a lens, get great pics kinda sporting event. If you REALLY want some good photos of your boys, maybe hire a professional. It'll be less expensive AND you'd get good pictures.

 

[ruifo]

Funny it seems optically worse than the Nikon. The Tamron and the Nikon both score a "16" on the DxO Mark scxale, and both lenses rate "9 MP" in resolving ability, but the Tamron has greater vignetting, 33% worse chromatic aberration. The two lenses equal on distortion. I do not see how thew Tamron is "better" is any meaningful way, but it is cheaper.

It's better in other bodies. Sorry for my incomplete words and inaccuracy.

Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon on Nikon D800E versus Nikkor AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II on Nikon D800E - Side by side lens comparison - DxOMark

And very close with the D5000.

 

[robbins.photo]

One other option to consider, KEH has a nice used Sigma 70-200 mm, it's not the OS version (optical stabilization) but for football odds are good you'll want to keep your shutter speed high enough that it won't make a huge difference, and it would be quite a bit cheaper:

https://www.keh.com/247059/sigma-70-200mm-f-2-8-apo-d-ex-hsm-n90s-later-autofocus-lens-for-nikon-77

I've done a lot of business with KEH, I bought one of my cameras and several lenses from them, everything I've gotten from them has been outstanding, never had any problems. There customer service truly is first rate.

 

[goodguy]

While I never compared physically the Sigma with the Tamron all the reviews say the Tamron is the better camera but only in points the Sigma is still a fantastic lens.
Check "robins.photos" Flickr and many of the pictures there were taken with his Sigma.
I simply dont think you will have enough to buy the Tamron, I bought it from the store and it cost me 1600$ with tax.
If you feel comfortable buying the lens through ebay then get the Tamron but if you want to buy it new from the store with warrenty then go for the Sigma simply because I think its in your price range and the Tamron aint.

Another think I want to comment of is Derrel idea of getting the Nikon 85mm 1.8G and get closer.
If you can do that then I actually tottaly agree with him, I used my Nikon 85mm in a dog show where lights were not very favorable, I used it on f1.8 with 1/320 and got fantastic results.
Of course best would be owning both lenses and choosing what to use but I think you will not have enough to go with both.
For general use the Nikon 85mm 1.8G is amazing for portrait but very limiting for landscape while the 70-200mm lenses are very versatile and flexible and I find I use my Tamron a lot more.

 

[CouncilmanDoug]

Op is also shooting with a d5000, which hardly usable past iso 800. My old high school had a guy that would shoot all the games and sell the photos very reasonably to parents, I would assume most other schools have the same idea.

 

[Didereaux]

Please help!! I own a Nikon D5000 and I would like to take great pics of my twin sons playing Varisty football in a few weeks. I can't afford the $2500 70-200mm lens, even though I would *love* to have it, because that is the type of photo I am going for.

I could possibly talk my husband into agreeing to up to $1200 or so total if it proved to be worth it. What can i use to get great quality photos and do I need a flash? I don't currently own one.

Thank you in advance!

You're pretty much hosed with that camera(low ISO), and only $1200. Sports ESPECIALLY high school football are low light, long shots. A day game you might get some shots with a 300+mm lens or a 200mm w/ext. HOWEVER, using the camera you have the 200mm PLUS a good Speedlight (off camera cabled/bracket whatever) and shoot the bench, or just action within 10 yds and you might get some really good shots. But stay away from tring the longer shots with a slow lens, and a noisy camera...just a pure waste of time.

 

[tia81280]

do you think my camera is too outdated?

is there a place online that i could sell my camera and use some of the profits to upgrade to something better? my boys have three more years of playing football under friday night lights so i need a long term solution.

also, any lens i buy i would be also using for my daughters (daytime) soccer games, so if the pictures aren't professional awesome quality for the boys, its not TOO big of a deal if they aren't 100% perfect, although of course i wish they could be... I'm just super picky. Even though I am not as educated on photography as most of you all P.S. thank you all for your help!

 

[robbins.photo]

do you think my camera is too outdated?

is there a place online that i could sell my camera and use some of the profits to upgrade to something better? my boys have three more years of playing football under friday night lights so i need a long term solution.

also, any lens i buy i would be also using for my daughters (daytime) soccer games, so if the pictures aren't professional awesome quality for the boys, its not TOO big of a deal if they aren't 100% perfect, although of course i wish they could be... I'm just super picky. Even though I am not as educated on photography as most of you all P.S. thank you all for your help!

Well if you already have roughly $1200 approved, you could get the Sigma 70-200 mm non OS version from KEH for $572, and get a used or refurbished D5200 and still stay under your budget, then you can sell off your D5000 when you have the time or keep it for a backup.

The 5200 will give you the 24 mp sensor and much better low light abilities, they truly are a fantastic camera. I should know, I own two.. lol.

 

[Mach0]

The "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD" is an excelent option.
Optically better than the Nikon sister, and around $1,500 new. You can find it on eBay for around $1,100.

Here some reviews:
- Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon on Nikon D5000 versus Nikkor AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II on Nikon D5000 - Side by side lens comparison - DxOMark
- http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...mron-70-200mm-f-2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-opinion.html

My shots with the "Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 SP Di VC USD":
- https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruimc/sets/72157641188279093/

Night football from the stands? Photos are not going to be very good even with a 70-200/2.8. Maybe you can get down on the sidelines with an 85/1.8, a truly FAST lens, and maybe get some frames in-focus, ones you can crop-in on later. Night football under the lights is not just a buy a lens, get great pics kinda sporting event. If you REALLY want some good photos of your boys, maybe hire a professional. It'll be less expensive AND you'd get good pictures.

+1

 

[tia81280]

really? Theres that much different between the D5000 and D5200?

 

[ruifo]

Yes, it is old. If you could upgrade your camera, you would be much better for sports.
The D5000 is being sold on eBay for around $250-$400.

If you sell it on eBay, you could have enough for this:
* Nikon D5200 with 18-55mm kit lens ($697) + Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G ($497) + Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G ($217) = ($1411)

Or this:
* Nikon D5300 with 18-55mm kit lens ($847) + Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G ($497) = ($1344)

Or this:
* Nikon D7100, with 18-140mm kit lens ($1397) + Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G ($497) = ($1894)

The three of them (D5200, D5300 and D7100) are 24 MPix. That means you can crop the image batter, if needed. That is usefull if you're not that close to the field. They have similar low light performance (D5200: 1284 ISO, D5300: 1338 ISO, D7100: 1256 ISO). The D5200 is of very good value. See the comparison below:

Nikon D5300 versus Nikon D7100 versus Nikon D5200 - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

Later, you can buy a 70-200mm fast lens, or somthing similar. Or get it now, used, instead of new.