Lens for H.S. Basketball- now w/ pics

[TROLL]

I'd just use a lens he has along with the flash and use that as a not ideal however passable option to shoot the game... if you are going to rent I think the 70-200 f2.8 is the lens to go with though.

[97TurboDSM]

if he's shooting just for fun then I agree to spend the least money possible. otherwise, rent something.

[Saab93Aero]

Originally Posted by 97TurboDSM

If he can find a place that will do a rent to buy(i know some do) then he can rent it for the game and if he likes it, he can purchase it later.

^ what place would this be?
i've rented from calumet, down in phila. before for football games, the rental price isnt too crazy, but i really need to purchase. cus if i keep renting it'll eventually just add up to purchase.

for the basketball games, this is my first one but will have a few more through out the season, so i think i will have to buy a new lens to shoot with. i couldnt do the 70-200 2.8 right now, but i have seen some 80-200 2.8, used around $600. and i've shot with one of them before and it worked pretty well.

unless the 85 1.8 or a 2.8 zoom that would be good in a gym?

[TROLL]

if you want a 70-200 f2.8 lens also consider the sigma version... i owned one in the past and it served me well in its day. i honestly dont know if there are any other products out there now that werent 5 years ago, or how new and used prices compare on things so my info may be outdated by now, not sure.
if you plan on shooting sports somewhat regularly i think some version of this lens will spend a lot of time on your camera, and its also good for lots of other things as well... so even if its a bit of money, it should pay off in time.

[97TurboDSM]

i cant remember the name off the top of my head but i know there is at least one place that you can rent to buy. as for purchasing, if you're going to be using it solely for indoor sports, i'd go with the 85 f1.8.

[TROLL]

i think a prime is a poor choice for sports because its a one trick pony... which is the reason i recommended the zoom.

i've shot a whole lot of indoor bball in crappy lighting, hockey, night football games, night soccer games, etc etc. with my 80-200 f2.8 and although bad light is bad light, its gotten me through it all... plus automotive photography, portrait work, racing, and so on.

but of course everyone has a different style and prefers different things.

[97TurboDSM]

my only reason for suggesting the prime, is the bigger aperture. besides that, the 70/80-200 f2.8 will be good. i can see the f1.8 being a huge help indoors. but i agree the zoom will be more versatile overall.

[Saab93Aero]

would this be a good used pick up?

http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/pho/967725702.html

[TROLL]

Now we're talking about a pro line lens from Nikon... it is an older version but the optics are high end.
There were 2 types of those lenses... the one and two touch. The older has a push pull ring for zoom and it also rotates for focus. The newer version had 2 rings... one for zoom and one for focus. I believe the image quality on both is very good, but maybe someone else on here would know.
Focus on either lens will be somewhat slow, but I think all things considered it would be a great lens on that kind of budget.
If you can see it in person definitley check it out and test it, and look at both front and rear glass to make sure they are in good condition without any scratches or marks, and also make sure there's not too much dust inside either (most use lenses do have a spec or three inside).
As for price, my guess is thats an avg. price and you could find others around there as well.

The Sigma lens is a 70-200 f2.8 I believe and hopefully could be had for $600 or less used. The image quality is probably close but not quite as good as a Nikon pro lens, but the advangage of it is it has HSM focusing which is a lot better and faster. Its comparable to the AF-S in Nikons (which the lens above does not have).

[97TurboDSM]

craigslist ad deleted.

[Saab93Aero]

so i think i will get the 85mm 1.8 from b&h (i'll use the links) and since ill be shopping there, do you guys think the nikon mb-d80 battery pack @ $130 is worth it from there? i have seen them on ebay @ $50, and @ $170 w/ 2 batteries.

[Saab93Aero]

I'm currently at a basketball game, shooting with a flash, but it's a nikon sb28. I can get the flash to work with my d90, but I cant get the exposure any faster than 1/200, and there is still blur, anyway to make the shutter speed faster?

[97TurboDSM]

nope. flash sync speed is only gonna be 1/250 with a newer flash. you need to turn up your iso and open the aperture as far as you can. shoot somewhere around 2.0/2.2 at iso1600 1/200. that should be plenty. if you find you're overexposed with those settings, turn the iso down as needed.

[Stanic]

i use the 70-200 2.8 afs vr for my sports shooting and it does wonders. I ordered the 85 1.8 for portraits but I will still try it for some sports. I used the 80-200 afd and the Sigma 70-200 HSM.

I think both are great lenses. The 80-200 from nikon is a stronger build and produces great colors. The sigma focuses a tad faster than the af-d nikon and is similar in quality. The Sigma is brand new for about 700$.

[Saab93Aero]

Here are 3 shots i managed to pull off with a 35-135mm f/3.5-5.6 lens.

All 3 are with a flash, so the max shutter speed i could get was 1/200 so u can see some blur. along with a high ISO since i could only get down to f/3.5 so pretty noisy.

c&c please.

i will be using this lens again tm, untill my 50 1.8 & 70-200 2.8 arrive friday.

1.


2.


3.

[97TurboDSM]

they're not bad. that lens is really hurting you big time. shooting at 2.8 or bigger with the flash will be much better.

[The Captain]

Oh ****, those chester cheerleaders are no joke when they start stomping. I love a good clippers game tho.

The pictures, obviously, don't have that crisp look to them. Not sure if it's completely blur or if its OOF.

[97TurboDSM]

first one is oof. the others are a combination.

[Saab93Aero]

thanks for the quick replys guys!
i tried shooting w/ a 24mm 2.8 supper wide, but forgot to drop down the iso when i switched lenses so when i tried to crop them, i did get too many shots.

Originally Posted by The Captain

Oh ****, those chester cheerleaders are no joke when they start stomping.

haha yea, it was a pretty interesting environment, but a GREAT game. i was shooting w/ my D90 so i got some pretty funny videos of each teams cheerleaders/crowd going at it during the breaks.

[YO CAMRY]

You're better off getting a faster lens that zooms a little further, but that's also very pricey. Boost your ISO up too, just not too much. And if you have to use a slower shutter speed, try panning the camera with the player.