Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Thu Oct 02, 2014 4:44 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:16 am
Posts: 8
Location: Sydney
Hi guys
I am currently looking for a new lens as recently been appointed "official photogrpaher' for the local rugby team. I am looking to buy a lens to suit. My budget is not that high as i am only volunteering for my mate. Max spend is around $1000 Aus. I am fairly close to the sideline running up and down with the newspaper guys with their L lens. :-) Massive lens envy!!

I am currently using a 75-300mm non IS and Non USM ($200) lens and the results are not that great. I was almost going to buy the Canon F4 70-200 USM (non IS) but concerned that i need more zoom. I noticed the Sigma 120-400mm at the local cam shop and the price wise is great. But wondering how it performs for action sports.

HSM compared to USM?

So my question is from the list below what would be the best lens for contact sport? I am close and on the side line, I will be buying a monopod shortly to assist so IS need not be an issue.

- Canon 70-200mm F4 ($800ish)
- Sigma 50-500mm (seen in local shop on special for $1200)
- If i consider the $1200 on the sigma its not that much more for the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 non IS.
- Sigma 120-400mm DG OS HSM ($850)
- Sigma 150-500mm DG OS HSM ($950)

I have 2 small boys soon to start sport so the lens will get plenty of use.

Any advice would be most welcome

Thanks

Muza
Canon 60D, 15-85mm, f1.8 50mm, 75-300mm, 430 Speedlite


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:57 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7955
Location: Germany
Hmm, tough question!
With sports I'd recommend forgetting about image-stabilization (because you need high shutter-speeds) and going for the largest aperture lens that your money can buy. Unfortunately the focal length is critical in determining the price of a say f2.8 lens like a good 70-200/2.8 (e.g. from Tamron).
So the most important thing is to decide what focal length is "enough" for your specific purpose. If it is around 200mm than go for a 70-200/2.8 lens. If you need more (like 300) you might try a Sigma 100-300/4.0 (of which I unfortunately got a pretty decentered copy) but as a new item should be above your budget.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8032
Location: UK
Muza,

Since you're already using up to 300mm zoom, look back at the photos you've taken previously and see how many were between 200-300mm.

Also there may be a saving from looking at used kit if that helps open the choice up a bit.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 4:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 2:03 am
Posts: 1452
Location: Gold Coast Australia
I disagree with the 70mm to ? because when the players are on top of you you are going to miss a number of shots, I would suggest a wide angle to 200mm, not sure if Canon has such a lens as Nikons 18-200mm. If you are going to shoot night games then of course you want something like a f2.8.

The footy field is only 68 X 100 metres and since you run along the line I believe my suggestion will work. I shoot surfers at 100 metres + with a 200mm and crop the ones that are any good. Remember every shot is not going to be a keeper, cropping the good ones is not a big deal. I have a 70-300 soft lens and never use it as even heavy cropping with the 200 lens gives me a better outcome.

I would not sacrifice lens quality for focal length with less IQ, as you said with your current lens "results are not that great" Go the Maroons" :wink:


Cheers

_________________
Nikon D7000, Nikkor 80 - 400G, Nikkor 18- 200 VR II, f3.5-5.6.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:16 am
Posts: 8
Location: Sydney
Thanks for the info guys! I am yet to decide but it gives me more to think about!!

Damm and I am making a few trips to the camera shops today and truly thinking the 70-200 2.8 is high on the list. I havent ruled out 2nd hand either!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 3:58 pm
Posts: 9
I realize this is an old thread but I've recently had a chance to use the Sigma 120-400 and thought I'd share some shots for anyone interested in that lens.

Image

Image

Image

Image

It was an overcast/hazy day. I was using a Canon T4i and was handholding the rig. No filtering or sharpening of the pictures. I did crop a couple of them a little but otherwise as came from the camera and converted to jpeg.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group