Indoor Basketball Photography

Marcus777 · May 12, 2012

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum and new to Digital photography. So no doubt i will ask a lot of stupid questions so please bear with me.

Looking to buy a Nikon camera and len's to take photos of my son playing basketball. It appears that this is not easy to do nor cheap.
Yes, I will read all relevant threads in your forums but in the meantime can anyone offer some advice on what to buy.

Lens's wise. i need a telephoto lens 70-200mm f2.8. Options Sigma/Nikon/Tamron for when i am not court side and one len's for when i am at one end of the court near baseline. perhaps a 85mm, F1.8 but that might not give me the reach. Perhaps sometime a little bit longer but with quick auto focus.

Body wise not really sure. I have been looking at the D300, D700 and D7000. I think the D3s is out of my league price wise.

Currently using a Nikon D60 with a Tamrom 70-300mm tele macro lens which is slow to focus and the kit lens is useless. So the question is do i upgrade the body and len's or just the lens.

i hope i am making sense.

KmH · May 12, 2012

For the ISO performance consider the D700 or the D7000. I would choose the prosumer D700 over the entry-level D7000 because of the D700's up to 8 fps rate, and 51 point auto focus system.

The D700 is full frame and you would want all FX lenses. The D7000 is DX and that also gives you the same 1.5x crop factor your D60 delivers.

Court side I would recommend the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras for either FX or DX bodies.

For not court side I would want more than 200 mm, but you can use your 70-300 to test the image scale you get with a DX camera (your D60) at 200 mm.

For a f/2.8 zoom on a budget I would recommend the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

Be sure to consider refurbished or used gear if you want to spend a bit less upgrading.

Tony S · May 12, 2012

Not sure on Nikon models, but you want something that will perform adequately at ISO 6400 with f.28 lenses. I shoot basketball with two bodies, one has the 24-70 on it and the other has the 70-200. If you have decent enough exposures you can crop from down court shots enough to get by without needing a longer focal length.

High shcool and lower gyms are tough to shoot in because they never consult a photographer for lighting needs. :grumpy:

Marcus777 · May 15, 2012

Hi and thankyou for your very helpful reply. I will let you know how i go

lonewolfsx · May 15, 2012

I think the D7000 would at least be adequate for your needs. I'd avoid the D300s, its an amazing camera but is due for replacement very soon, plus the new price of that body is close to a used D700, which would be way more awesome. One note though; the D700 is only capable of 8fps as stated before with the optional battery grip, it's 5 fps without (still pretty fast).

I'd definitely go for the 70-200 f/2.8 type of lens, and court-side the optimal lens would probably be the 24-70 f/2.8 or variant thereof.

If you're using a crop body though (like your D60 or the D7000/D300s), try a variant of the 17-50 f/2.8 lenses... it will be equivalent to the 24-70 and should get you some solid shots if you're sitting down behind the nets somewhere, and the tamron version is crazy sharp (though supposedly not the fastest to autofocus). Still stick with the 70-200 type lens even on a crop though, it'll get you great reach from the stands and also future-proof you a little if you decide to go with a full frame camera (like the D700) later on.

As an alternative, Sigma makes a 50-150mm f/2.8 lens for crop bodies that is supposedly pretty good, but if you're ever considering a full frame body I'd avoid that lens, though it might be good on a budget as a single lens solution.

Marcus777 · May 16, 2012

Hi lonewolfsx, Thanks for your reply. It's been very helpful.

I am hoping to save enough money to buy the D700. In terms of a 70-200 f2.8 i would like the Nikkon but becasue of budget may have to go with the Sigma or Tamrom.

Can i ask a couple of questions:

1. What is the battery grip on the D700 an how does it work.
2. What does "crop" mean". How does this impact on my needs.

once again,
thankyou for taking the time to help me

TheLost · May 17, 2012

1) The battery grip makes it easier to rotate the camera and take a vertical picture and it also can increase the battery life of the camera.
2) Nikon DX (crop sensor) cameras have a smaller sensor then FX (full frame) cameras. Multiply the lens by 1.5 to get the actual value. For example, a 70-200mm lens on a DX camera would be the equivalent of a 105mm-300mm on a FX camera (the same lens on a FX camera is a true 70-200mm).

I happen to have a 6'7" 15 year old son so i have quite a bit of experience shooting Indoor Basketball

.

I am very happy with the performance of my D7000. It's ISO performance and high frame rate make it (IMHO) the best option in Nikon's DX line up. A used D700 (full frame camera) will do better... but its also double the price.

For lenses it all depends on where you want to take pictures from and how much you want to spend..

Court Side Access:
I've had great results with the cheap-o Nikon 50mm 1.8D prime. You have to move around a bit but this $120 lens will defiantly get the job done. It takes a bit of practice to use a prime lens in a fast game like basketball, but the 16mp of the D7000 gives you room enough to crop and the f/1.8 aperture is awesome in low light gyms. Moving up to the 50mm 1.8G will give you a *titch* faster auto focus speed and a bit better bokah.

Another great lens is the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. At less then 1/3 the price of Nikon's 17-55mm f/2.8 its an amazing bargain. Look around at some of the reviews on this lens and you'll see its a great option. The Sigma HSM focus system is always super fast (faster then other 3rd party lenses).

The Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 is a great lens.. but (IMHO) on a DX camera save your money and get the sigma.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8.. Good option, but with the crop factor (36-105mm) i found the 17-55 more useful up close.

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8.. Same focal length as the sigma.. but, if you have the money you should buy it. (its an amazing lens)

Bleachers (non-sideline-access):
Nikon 85mm f/1.8 prime is ok. I know a few people that like to use it for basketball. Its a good low-light option but there is a better option for about the same price. That would be..

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II (the older non-OS version). Priced at about $800 new and $600 used (i paid $500 for a used version) its an AMAZING bargain of you can find it. Its a bit soft wide open at 200mm, but its also much cheaper then Nikons 70-200mm f/2.8. It has one of the fastest auto-focus systems you can find (again, only the Nikon will be better). I bought this lens to use until i could afford the Nikon version... and after spending a year with it i'm not sure i need the more expensive Nikon. (This is the one to get if you have ~$800 to spend)

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM (older older non-OS version). Not as good as the HSM II. Probably ok if you get a good deal on it..

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM OS (new version with image stabilization). IMHO, not worth the $1.3k. For a few more $$ you can pick up a used Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI. The only added feature over the older HSM II model is the image stabilization and you don't need that for sports. For about the same price the Nikon cant be beat.

Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 HSM OS. Its a strange range for a lens.. but an OK option. Built for DX to give the same range as a 70-200mm on FX. IMHO, i'd get a 70-200mm.

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8. Forget about this lens... Its a tid-bit-sharper wide open.. but Its auto-focus system is too slow for sports.

Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8. An OK option, but has very slow auto-focus. Not a good choice for sports.

Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI. Buy it if you can afford it.. older version of the newer VRII. (this is the one to get if you have ~$1.5k to spend)

Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII. Just buy it and hope your kid gets a scholarship. It is the 'Do-All' best of the list.

There you go... my quick take on the lenses I've rented, own, or borrowed. The trick is to spend money on the lenses, but still get body with good low light handling.

Best option:
D700 (or even a D800 if you can find it), Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII.

2nd best option (the setup i have):
D7000, Sigma 17-55mm f/2.8, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM II.

I should also note that my son is also in High School Rugby and Football. My setup works great for those sports also.

Welcome to the world of kid sports! :lol:

Marcus777 · May 18, 2012

Hi "The Lost" Wow, Awesome detailed reply. Thank you so much for taking the time for this reply. It is amazing the information you have given me. I think that pretty much sums it all. i don't think i could ask for anymore.
You have given me plenty to read up on and think about. I really want the D700 so i had better start saving hard. (I can always sell my current gear) If not, i will get the D7000. either way it will be a big improvement on what i am using at the moment. I am taking some BBall photos tonight so i will upload over the next couple of days. You have a 15 year old who is 6'7" that's amazing. What Basketball Club does he play for?. My youngest son is playing Victorian Championship for diamond Valley Eagles U14's. He is only 13 but is almost 6' tall. Once again, thankyou for your reply. It has been very informative for such a newbie like me.

TheLost · May 18, 2012

A great option is to rent some gear to see what you like. In my area its about $25 a day for the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 or 24-70mm. The body's are about the same price to rent.... So for ~$50 you could try a full setup for a game.

My son has played on a few 'super league' teams and is now on the local high school team. The sad fact is he likes football (american) more then basketball

. It's easy for a tall skinny kid to get a scholarship for basketball.. Not so easy for football. That's why I'm stuck with the d7000 and sigma gear.. I can't spend his collage fund yet