Amateur need help with sports shooting

[gramsx5]

I am a amateur grandma behind the lens.
I have boys playing high school football, and am trying to decide which is the best lens to use to take close up shots from the grand stands as well as the sidelines. I am using a Nikon D3200 with a 18-55 & a 55-200mm lens, but neither gives me the close up I am looking for.

Would appreciate any help on the best zoom lens to use {prefer auto focus} up to the $300.00 dollar range.

 

[Overread16 4]

I don't know the Nikon lines well enough to suggest a specific lens but I've a feeling that a 70-300mm is going to be about your best bet for that budget. If you have a few shots you could show to give an example of what you currently get that might help (it could also serve as some help with settings or other factors if you have any trouble there).

Sidelines I would think a 55-200mm should be enough; in the stands even 300mm might be not enough (really depends how big and how far back you are from the action).

The other issue is light, if its daytime you should be fine; if you're into the evenings and nighttimes (not as much an issue at this time of the year for most places) then you might find it a struggle to get the shutter speeds you want.

 

[sscarmack]

Save your money and hire a professional for one game. It'll be a lot cheaper and you'll get way better photos.

Just my .2

 

[ronlane]

Shooting sports, especially football is expensive. A lens like a 70-200 f/2.8 can be effective from the sidelines, but they still probably won't get you as close as you'd like. You can put a 1.4 or 2.0x teleconverter on that but either of those is going to cost you the $300 themselves and will cost you 1 and 2 stops of light respectively.

 

[gramsx5]

The school does not allow us to have private photographer's on the field. I already thought of that and was shot down before I could finish asking.
I do have sideline privilege's myself but I truly stink at photography. I have 3 boys playing in each squad, so I am willing to invest in the lens, because I will have 4 more years of football to try and capture these memories.

 

[KmH]

If the boys play at night you need a 'fast' lens that has a wide maximum aperture so it can gather light quickly.
To make close up shots you need focal length, at least 300mm, but 400 mm is better.

As focal length and lens aperture size increase, so does the cost of the lens.
Nikon's 300 mm f/2.8 prime lens is a $6000 lens.
Many pro sports shooters use lenses like Nikon's $12,000, 400 mm f/2.8 prime lens

If the boys play in daylight, Nikon's $600 (for a new one, used is less costly) Nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF VR Nikkor Zoom Lens will work.
In fact the FX, AF-S 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF VR is one of Nikon's best lens values.

When I shot a local daytime adult soccer league I used 3 camera bodies and 3 lenses so i didn't have to range up and down the sidelines. I shot from the end of the field so players were moving at me rather than across my line of sight:
1. The now only $700 (was $1100 when I bought it) Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS HSM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
2. The $1100 Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Zoom Nikkor Lens Note: Does not AF on your D3200 because D3x00 and D5x00 do not have an auto focus motor in the camera. D7x00 and up Nikon cameras do have an AF motor in the camera.
3. The $1000 Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens

 

[gramsx5]

Kmh, thank you for this info that is what I wanted to know.

Not sure I will be dropping 6k on a lens, but at least I now know what to search for and can move forward.

I am glad I found this forum very nice, knowledgeable people.
Thank you

 

[sscarmack]

Since you can't hire "private" photographers, find a photographer already there and ask him nicely and sling him a $50, my guess is he'd be more than willing to snag a couple extra photos of Johnny.

 

[Derrel]

My advice for a long time has been to buy a truly "fast" short telephoto, and then later crop the images at the computer. My lens recommendation is different from what many people recommend,because there is more than one way to shoot football, and you're shooting for 'memories', and not for a daily newspaper or weekly magazine. "Modern" football photos are in many ways, very poor recordings of the games and plays and players, but are instead, very often limited to very close-in, half-body shots that feature one or two players at most. Professionals shooting 300,400, and 500 and even 600mm lenses are forced to take very small segments of the game. There's no "context" really, it's all provided by captions that say, "Running back so and so scored on this third-quarter off tackle run to tie the score at 14-14," and so on.

My advice: if you do shoot from the sidelines, stay 7 yards ahead of the line of scrimmage, and stay alert, and shoot with an 85mm f/1.8 AF-S Nikkor lens, and CROP later. The D3200 has a 24MP sensor...it shoots high-resolution images, and you can throw 50 to 75% of a well-exposed, crisp frame away, and still make a good picture. Seeing OLD football photos, like those shot in the 1930's through the 1960's, you can actually SEE "the plays", complete with both lines, complete with burned defensive backs and befuddled linebacker crews, on TD passes...you can see some actual CONTEXT of the games...

A breakaway dive play off right tackle from the stands shows the lines, and the RB as he scampers thru open field, the goal posts in sight in the middle of the image...the "professional's" 300/2.8 shot from the 20 yard sideline shows a single, isolated kid, running in space, with NOTHING else....there's no picture worth a damn--but it makes a good caption!

Spend the $400 and get the AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 G lens. That is the ONLY lens you can afford that will actually be useful AND which will allow you to shoot at high school fields, night or day, at High ISO values like 1600 or 3200, and at f/2 and 1/500 second at night. You need the G-series model for autofocusing on the D3200. A lot of football happens as plays come right toward the sidelines, and in the endzone areas, an 85mm lens is plenty long enough. FORGET shooting football the modern "professional" for-publication way, and show some context, and crop-in on images you want to be closer-up. It takes way too much practice and skill and big glass to shoot football the "professional" way, which is tight,tight,tight framing...so do it the old-fashioned way, where the game is shown more within the context of seeing 5 to 15 players, or seeing breakaway scores with more players, more field visible. And then if you need to, CROP later!

Shoot looser, with a TOP-quality, high resolution lens. The 85mm f/1.8 G series is one of the ten sharpest lenses in the world, even at its low cost of $405.

 

[BillM]

And not every shot needs to be an "action" shot, as you are shooting for memories that are a lot of opportunities to get good shots.

Like this

2014 HS Football - C6Bill

2014 HS Football - C6Bill

2013 HS Football - C6Bill

 

[JoeW]

Derrel's advice is spot on. The key here is NOT the focal length, it's the speed (or rather, the aperture). You want glass that has an f2.8 aperture. A decent 200mm zoom with f2.8 will run you about $1,000 (unless you get a pro version and then you'll spend a heckuva lot more).

So get a medium range zoom that has something like an f2.8 aperture. Then shoot at a fast speed (for football, I'm going to say around 1/500th of a second and even then you may still get some blur). And them crop the photos a lot. If you don't have to jack up the ISO and if you get a fast shutter speed, you should be able to to crop a lot and do well.

 

[Dave442]

I agree with the 85mm f/1.8G that Derrel noted, crop later in your computer.
I have the 70-300mm that Keith mentioned and that's what I often use for daytime sports.
You probably don't need tight shots from every single game, might look to rent a lens for a game or two.