Which Lense for Capturing Indoor Sporting Events?

[Village Idiot]

Current price for the 70-200 f/2.8 Image Stabilizer lens is $1,949 from Adorama, with I think it's a 3 year warranty. The Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 Vibration Reduction lens is $1,929 from Adorama, with Nikon's 5 year warranty. One wants to compare like with like,and the addition of VR or IS is actually quite helpful under many conditions. When using the newer, high-megapixel cameras like the Nikon D3x, expert photographers have noted that camera support becomes critical,and that degraded results can be noticed at shutter speeds like 1/200 second using a tele-zoom, but that VR can overcome the effects of camera shake.

VR or IS is helpful at getting better panning images,and is helpful in the wind, or when you are slightly out of breath, or when shooting pictures when you happen to be excited, with heart pounding,etc. VR makes for sharper images across a whole spectrum of shooting scenarios,and can accomplish what a tripod cannot do, or when a tripod cannot be used.

Comparing the 70-200 L-IS versus the 70-200VR has already been done at dPreview,and it has been done by me. I own both lenses,and the Nikon is the clear handling and ergonomics winner--more slender barrel, smoother zoom and focusing action, an auto-switching model 1 and mode 2 VR detection system,and AF lock buttons on the 70-200VR all make it the better-handling 70-200mm zoom. But then of course, it's also a newer optical and mechanical design than Canon's,and Nikon had ample time to look at Canon's design in order to better it in several key areas. The Nikon is also clearly the better APS-C lens, the Canon is the better lens on Full Frame.Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens Review: 6. Conclusion & samples: Digital Photography Review

The "new" Nikkor, re-computed for Full Frame, is not even on the market yet, but as with the other "new" Nikkor zooms like 14-24 and 24-70,will probably be the leader among all maker's 70-200's, as shown by the MTF graphs Nikon has up at their website....the new lens will have superb bokeh,and amazing contrast, resolution, and stop-to-stop consistency.

It's always easy to create a bogus value comparison by looking at the price of the non-IS Canon lens at $1249, but that lens has no stabilizer system. One could also look at the 80-200 ED Nikkor zoom at $1,099 from Adorama for comparable optics, but no VR. VR and IS are simply incredible benefits in a lens,and that is why the stabilized Canon and Nikon models are within $20 of one another at reputable USA dealers like Adorama.com. As MP counts go up past the 20MP mark, stabilizing the camera becomes more and more critical to getting truly sharp images,and a lens like the above has a 10-15 year lifespan.

Lens prices went up. With certain Canon rebates, which they were doing on a regular basis, you could get a new 70-200 f/2.8L IS for about $1400-$1500, iirc. New was selling for $around $1600. I bought a new one for a little over $1500 and a used one for about $1300.

 

[davisreed]

The 85 1.8 is a fantastic lens, however, for sports I want a zoom. ... Now for indoor sports, the 85 might be ideal. I have that lens and use it for BB games, ... Weddings and Other Family Events, Discuss Wedding and Other Family Event........

 

[shortpballer]

70-200 2.8!!!!! I dont need the IS. However, some people swear by it.

 

[musicaleCA]

70-200 2.8!!!!! I dont need the IS. However, some people swear by it.

The IS version is weather-sealed too.

 

[rlcphotos]

I use the Sigma 70/200 2.8 HSM lens can be bought for the neighborhood of $850.00 to $1200.00 excellent lens for football and other sports

 

[rwphotography]

Current price for the 70-200 f/2.8 Image Stabilizer lens is $1,949 from Adorama, with I think it's a 3 year warranty. The Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 Vibration Reduction lens is $1,929 from Adorama, with Nikon's 5 year warranty. One wants to compare like with like,and the addition of VR or IS is actually quite helpful under many conditions. When using the newer, high-megapixel cameras like the Nikon D3x, expert photographers have noted that camera support becomes critical,and that degraded results can be noticed at shutter speeds like 1/200 second using a tele-zoom, but that VR can overcome the effects of camera shake.

VR or IS is helpful at getting better panning images,and is helpful in the wind, or when you are slightly out of breath, or when shooting pictures when you happen to be excited, with heart pounding,etc. VR makes for sharper images across a whole spectrum of shooting scenarios,and can accomplish what a tripod cannot do, or when a tripod cannot be used.

Comparing the 70-200 L-IS versus the 70-200VR has already been done at dPreview,and it has been done by me. I own both lenses,and the Nikon is the clear handling and ergonomics winner--more slender barrel, smoother zoom and focusing action, an auto-switching model 1 and mode 2 VR detection system,and AF lock buttons on the 70-200VR all make it the better-handling 70-200mm zoom. But then of course, it's also a newer optical and mechanical design than Canon's,and Nikon had ample time to look at Canon's design in order to better it in several key areas. The Nikon is also clearly the better APS-C lens, the Canon is the better lens on Full Frame.Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens Review: 6. Conclusion & samples: Digital Photography Review

The "new" Nikkor, re-computed for Full Frame, is not even on the market yet, but as with the other "new" Nikkor zooms like 14-24 and 24-70,will probably be the leader among all maker's 70-200's, as shown by the MTF graphs Nikon has up at their website....the new lens will have superb bokeh,and amazing contrast, resolution, and stop-to-stop consistency.

It's always easy to create a bogus value comparison by looking at the price of the non-IS Canon lens at $1249, but that lens has no stabilizer system. One could also look at the 80-200 ED Nikkor zoom at $1,099 from Adorama for comparable optics, but no VR. VR and IS are simply incredible benefits in a lens,and that is why the stabilized Canon and Nikon models are within $20 of one another at reputable USA dealers like Adorama.com. As MP counts go up past the 20MP mark, stabilizing the camera becomes more and more critical to getting truly sharp images,and a lens like the above has a 10-15 year lifespan.

Lens prices went up. With certain Canon rebates, which they were doing on a regular basis, you could get a new 70-200 f/2.8L IS for about $1400-$1500, iirc. New was selling for $around $1600. I bought a new one for a little over $1500 and a used one for about $1300.

Where is it for that price? I just bought the non IS for $1349. The IS was $1899 which I couldnt stomach paying for. I'm still learning to use it but so far, havent gotten into a situation (even in low-light at a dance recital) where I was like "man I wish I had gotten the IS."

 

[fstop]

Thanks to all for the input. I ended up ordering a Nikon D90 without any glass and then ordered the 35mm 1.8 prime just to have something immediately.

First order of business will be to impress the wife with some indoor natural light shots over the POS (point and shoot...piece of Sh$*) and work on the green light for the 70-200mm 2.8. May rent one without VR to see if I can save ~$1000 bucks. My main use will be kids action stuff so I may not need the VR with the quick shutter. Though if it has the potential as a 10 year staple, maybe its worth springing for it.

I was reading that the VR II doesn't have the focus lock that the exising 70-200mm 2.8 has. For indoor swimming, if I'm picking a point on a lane would the focus lock be worthwhile or is this thing fast enough?

Thanks again to all for your guidance. Saved myself a few bills on the kit lens that would have ended up sitting in a bag.

 

[Big]

lol yeah you'd be surprised at the number of people who spell lens incorrectly.

I think a lot of it has to do with origin. People from Europe spell it "lense" such as they spell shoppe, colour, etc. (I think anyway)

 

[Dao]

lol yeah you'd be surprised at the number of people who spell lens incorrectly.

I think a lot of it has to do with origin. People from Europe spell it "lense" such as they spell shoppe, colour, etc. (I think anyway)

Are you sure about that on the word lense? AskOxford.com has lens, but not lense. (search the compact Oxford dictionary)

 

[KmH]

.......I was reading that the VR II doesn't have the focus lock that the exising 70-200mm 2.8 has. For indoor swimming, if I'm picking a point on a lane would the focus lock be worthwhile or is this thing fast enough?

I believe the lock you are talking about only comes with the VRII and it's not a focus lock but a mechanical lens creep lock that has to be disabled to zoom out from 70mm. Focus is controlled by the microprocessor in the camera.

Again, for your purposes, I would recommend a long look at the AF 80-200mm f/2.8D, $1100 new (and a little less for a good used example) and it will serve you well for 10 years. It has both the sharpness and speed you need at 1/2 the price of a 70-200 mm f/2.8 VR.

Using an extender will result in an apparent decrease in your max aperture. A 1.4x will result in a loss of 1.4 stops and a 2x will cost 2 stops.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Depending on where you live, you can also rent lenses.

So instead of spending $1800 on a 70-200, spend $25 per weekend for a 300mm f/4 or something.

 

[fstop]

Again, for your purposes, I would recommend a long look at the AF 80-200mm f/2.8D, $1100 new (and a little less for a good used example) and it will serve you well for 10 years. It has both the sharpness and speed you need at 1/2 the price of a 70-200 mm f/2.8 VR.

Keith, Is the difference between the 80-200mm and the 70-200mm VR 2.8's basically the Vibration Reduction? (I definitely don't think the 70mm vs. 80mm will matter to me). At what shutter speed does VR add any value? I think your right for sports, I'd be burning another thousand bucks that isn't necessary for my main interest. If I got into anything that required slower shutter speeds, I could toss the thing on a pod --which I'd probably end up doing anyway and turning VR Off!

My natural impulse is to go big if it's going to be a 10 year piece, but to blow cash on something I don't need is pointless.

I suppose I could try to rent one and see how it works out. The light is REALLY crappy at the indoor swim (definitely not the birds nest!). If the 2.8 didn't cut it, is there any advantage of the 2.8 vs. the variable 4. to 5. in the 80-200mm for the outdoor shots at the longer focal lengths from a crispness and bokeh perspective? Getting a little ahead of myself here, but at even $1100, makes sense to probably rent the thing and make sure I can capture images that are worth while under pretty lame indoor lighting conditions.

Supposed to get the D90 body tomorrow...can't wait to start shooting.

Thanks again.

 

[hankejp]

Definately go with the large Aperature. I used a Sigma 70/300 4 -5.6 for shooting gymnastics last year and it sucked. I got a few good shots, but the majority had blurriness in them.

I think you'd be MUCH happier with the 2.8. I keep checking craigslist for a zoom 2.8 and to offload mi Sigma.

Good luck.

 

[bhphotography]

I shoot hockey tournaments all winter long. I shoot at f2.8 100% of the time. I use the 70-200 f2.8 and end up with iso ranges from iso 400 to iso 1600 depending on the arena. The arenas that have the foil roofs are the best as they tend to be brighter. The d90 can go as high as iso 1600 but I would keep it to iso 1250 or lower when possible.

The 200mm f2 lens is a good option, however if there is any up close action, it will be useless. Most of the time you would have to shoot from the bench, due to all the safety netting that has been put into arenas lately.

 

[fstop]

BH, Thanks for the input. I'm resigned to the 2.8, not decided if it will be the 80-200mm without the VR or 70-200MM VR. Dumb question, but at the hockey tournaments, where do you recommend hanging out if you can't get by the players bench/press type situation? is it better to be up above the glass/boards or can you shoot through the glass with proper filter? Went to a pro game the other night and was jealous of the media pro that had remoted strobes all over the place.