Football lenses

[Huyghejay]

I would like to purchase a good lens for my wife for football pictures. She currently has a Nikon d300s with a AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 lens. She has really gotten into photography and is taking the pictures for the yearbook. (my sons team). Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

 

[Infinite_Day]

Depends on how much you would like to invest. Is she shooting action shots or just the group team photo? Most people will probably tell you the 70-200mm f/2.8 or something even longer like a 300mm f/2.8 if you want to get good low-light action shots. Of course they are both quite pricey with the more expensive 300mm coming in at about $5500.

 

[Big Mike]

Welcome to the forum.

Shooting sports, especially sports like football (large field), can really push the limits of your photography gear. This is why pro sports shooters use some of the most expensive gear; cameras and especially lenses.

For example, she'll probably want a longer lens. 200mm is long, but maybe not long enough, 300mm might be better. The problem is that her 18-200mm lens or any 300mm lens (zoom or not) that costs less than $1000+, will have a maximum aperture of F5.6. The trouble with that, is that it will be limiting in terms of how fast the shutter speed can be. And when shooting sports, shutter speed is fairly important.

That's why the pros use lenses like a 300mm F2.8 or 400mm F2.8. They are long AND they have a large maximum aperture...but that also makes them large and very expensive.

If she's shooting in bright daylight, the problem won't be as bad. The brighter light will allow for a faster shutter speed, but if she's trying to shoot at night, under the lights...then good luck. Even a pro's gear would struggle in that situation.

The good news is that modern cameras are pretty good at higher ISO levels. So she can turn the ISO up to 3200 (give or take) and that will help with faster shutter speeds.

 

[cnutco]

Depends on how much you would like to invest. Is she shooting action shots or just the group team photo? Most people will probably tell you the 70-200mm f/2.8 or something even longer like a 300mm f/2.8 if you want to get good low-light action shots. Of course they are both quite pricey with the more expensive 300mm coming in at about $5500.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 is great if she can get to the sideline to shoot, but even then seems a bit short at times. Never-the-less, it is a good starting point and can be used for many other situations.

As far as the other lenses that were mentioned, I guess that depends on your budget.

I am not to sure about the D300s under the lights, but I have found that my D90 out performs my D300 in low light. I would hope this is not the case with the newer D300s though!

 

[Destin]

If she is shooting alot of night stuff, a 70-200 would be the best bet for a semi reasonable price. You can get the Sigma version for about $800, it's what I use, and it's pretty freakin good for the money. You can also get a used Nikon 80-200 2.8 AF-D for around the same price on ebay.

If you want the new 70-200 VRII, you're talking about spending almost $2,000.

Now, if she is shooting daytime sports, then you have another VERY good option in the Nikon 300 f/4. It's a full stop slower, but it's an insanely sharp 300mm prime lens that is great for sports. The new af-s version is selling in the neighborhood of $1200 new, and the older, and just as good AF-D version is going for $5-600 on ebay.

 

[penfolderoldo]

Action photography is 1 of the hardest to get right, and is probably 1 of the few photography scenarios where gear plays as big a part - or bigger - than the abilities of the photographer. It would be easy to say just go out and splash $$$ on a 300 2.8, but starting out, i'd think about something like a 70 - 200 2.8, there are some great secondhand deals out there. I'd suggest going with Nikon if you can afford it, however the Sigma 70 - 200 2.8 is worthy of consideration, particularly the later version with OS, Sigma's own version of VR.

 

[KmH]

I would hope this is not the case with the newer D300s though!

The D300s was just a slight upgrade of the D300 that added video, a second memory card slot, and some minor upgrades to the EXPEED image processor that added a little but not much, ISO performance.

 

[jaomul]

As said above the ISO in newer cameras can be pushed a bit and if you are not trying to sell shots you will probably find sigmas 120-400 or 150 to 500mm lens with OS with the nikon 300s will take great yearbook sports shots.Masssive ranges on both but they are big and heavy. A lot of bird shooters like them and if they good enough for them...