Lens usage

[xsouthpawed]

I currently use a Canon 10d with the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 lens and a 50mm f/1.4 prime. Which one do you guys think would be better to use in shooting indoor sports? (28-105mm for the reach vs. 50mm for the f/1.4)
I don't know if the iso reduction is that great on my camera..

Below is a comparison of iso levels between 10d and 40d
http://www.flickr.com/photos/markrabo/2148973833/sizes/o/

Thanks

 

[Josh66]

Well, you have both, so why not take both with you?

I guess a lot depends on how much light there will be at the arena, but 50mm does seem a little on the short side...

 

[xsouthpawed]

mm. Do you think buying a telephoto lens would be worthwhile? I want to try out something like a 70-300mm range. (It'd probably be 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM) I'm in a tight budget. The IS really appeals to me as I've never used a lens with image stabilization before.

 

[Josh66]

mm. Do you think buying a telephoto lens would be worthwhile? I want to try out something like a 70-300mm range. (It'd probably be 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM) I'm in a tight budget. The IS really appeals to me as I've never used a lens with image stabilization before.

It won't really be good for low light, and IS won't help either (and it's slower than the lens you already have). You need shutter speed.

IS is good for a lot of things, but I don't think sports is one of them. At the shutter speeds you would be shooting sports at, IS won't matter.


I don't know that there's a low budget solution to this... With a low budget, you won't be able to get anything faster than what you have. The 50 is definitely fast enough - but is it long enough?

See if that 105 will work, if not - try to get close enough to use the 50.

 

[xsouthpawed]

mm. okay

but i'm curious. what would telephoto lens at around that price be good for? (especially the IS)

 

[KmH]

Outdoor daytime field sports, photographing birds at a feeder from a blind, portraits, etc.

 

[Josh66]

It would probably be a fine all around telephoto, and the IS would help a lot for stationary objects (IS can't stop the subject from moving... ) Just not really up to shooting sports, IMO. (Indoor, low light sports anyway.)

 

[Felix 222]

the 105mm is better. i rather have great shots with a little more noise than ok shots with less noise.

 

[xsouthpawed]

yeah. I read that the 50mm's great for under the hoop shooting for basketball or something.

So it seems like the 70-300 IS is a good investment, just not suitable for indoor sports and such?

Btw, thank you so much for the replies guys. I really appreciate it!~