Need recommendations

[RKS]

I have a Canon T2i (not FF) and looking for a zoom. It will mostly be used for taking pictures at basketball (indoor) and football/baseball (outdoor). I want to keep it under $500.

I have the two kit zoom lenses and the nifty fifty.

Thanks for any help.

 

[bigi]

Used Tokina 12-24 F/2.8

Nothing really available besides that below 500.

 

[RKS]

Used Tokina 12-24 F/2.8

Nothing really available besides that below 500.

thanks, will the 12-24 put me close to the action?

any other options if I was to bump the budget and consider pre-owned?

 

[Syborg1211]

A 12-24mm is really wide angle. So you would have to literally be in the action to put yourself close to the action. Unfortunately zoom lenses for sports don't come cheap. You might look for some used 70-200 or 80-200 lenses out there. There are 70-300's out there that will give you more reach, but they are really slow at autofocusing so you'll miss the shot if you try to truck out there with a cheapo zoom like that.

 

[CuriousMike]

For a budget, just get the 55-250; new it's $300 or refurbished for $200ish.

Outdoor, it will do fine.
Indoor, it will suffer - be sure to boost your ISO way up - yes, your photos will look grainy, but they'll be OK.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...JVKX5DPF8ZFRXA

 

[CuriousMike]

I have a Canon T2i (not FF) and looking for a zoom. It will mostly be used for taking pictures at basketball (indoor) and football/baseball (outdoor). I want to keep it under $500.

I have the two kit zoom lenses and the nifty fifty.

Thanks for any help.

Wait - I missed the part about "I have the two kit zoom lenses."
I presume the first is the 18-55.
What is your second?

 

[RKS]

Wait - I missed the part about "I have the two kit zoom lenses."
I presume the first is the 18-55.
What is your second?

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III which is not a bad lens but I wondering is there was something reasonable that was faster/sharper.

 

[RKS]

A 12-24mm is really wide angle. So you would have to literally be in the action to put yourself close to the action. Unfortunately zoom lenses for sports don't come cheap. You might look for some used 70-200 or 80-200 lenses out there. There are 70-300's out there that will give you more reach, but they are really slow at autofocusing so you'll miss the shot if you try to truck out there with a cheapo zoom like that.

I have the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III which is slowish and not as sharp as would like.

 

[CuriousMike]

At $500, you're going to have a hard time doing better ... and the 300mm can be critical for baseball.

The Tamron 70-300 is considered sharp at 300mm and has excellent vibration reduction.

 

[RKS]

At $500, you're going to have a hard time doing better ... and the 300mm can be critical for baseball.

The Tamron 70-300 is considered sharp at 300mm and has excellent vibration reduction.

Thanks again. At what price point would I find something significantly faster/sharper?

 

[CuriousMike]

For basketball, I wonder if the 24-105 f/4.0 would be useful (for faster).

I'm not a Canon guy, so I should just slowly walk away from this discussion now.

 

[Berliner]

I don't know any reasonable options.

Your body is very limited by ISO and AF and your budget is too limited for a useful lens, like the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 or 80-200mm f/2.8. You don't need IS for action.

Does your budget include selling the 300mm zoom? If not you might get a working, but beat looking f/2.8 within that range.

Only other alternative that comes to mind is the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8. You will want to test that one before you buy. I'm not sure how good it performs, but the AF should be fast enough.

 

[RKS]

Thanks guys. I may borrow some lens until I upgrade to FF.

 

[NAC]

I have the 55-250 STM. I think it is excellent. I considered upgrading to a 70-200 f4L, but I'd sacrifice on the wide end and the long end and I don't think I'd get better pictures. It'll work well on your T2i.

I would think that for indoor basketball, you'll get better results with the 50mm than any zoom under $500. Experiment with your position - presumably close to the offensive basket of the team you want to photograph.

 

[turtile]

At that price range, there is really no fast lens. For under $400, you can pick up a 85mm F1.8.

 

[RKS]

thank again for the input.

what about Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens for EOS SLR/DSLR Cameras NEW $648

 

[Berliner]

How close are you? How well lit are the indoor games?

I don't think anything above f/2.8 will do for indoor.

The 85 1.8 is not a bad suggestion, although I dont know how fast the AF is.

 

[CuriousMike]

For basketball, I wonder if the 24-105 f/4.0 would be useful (for faster).

what about Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens for EOS SLR/DSLR Cameras NEW $648

I'm thinking an f/4 is a good option for people on a budget; as you can see from my sig, I'm a big f/4 kinda guy.

105mm will definitely short for baseball or football, but those are outside and your 75-300 will cover you there.

Of course if you can find a 70-200 f/2.8 in your price range, that will give you more light indoors and is your best bet.

I'd say go f/4.0 and boost the ISO and deal with the noise.

If you can, rent a couple lenses you're considering and see if they work for you.

 

[Berliner]

I have a Canon T2i

I'd say go f/4.0 and boost the ISO and deal with the noise.

That's just mean I have a camera in that ISO performance range and even with an f/2.8 its almost impossible to get half-decent results for indoor sports.

 

[nk215]

At that price range you will be able to get a used 70-200/4.0 non IS. It's an L lens so you do get the solid built, fast AF you just don't have IS and f2.8.

If you can save a little more ($1000) then you can get the old 70-200/2.8 IS the original version. The new version is superior but at 2x the price.

I do not recommend third party lens (sigma or tamron) for sport. While they maybe optically similar, there focus speed and focus consistency are never the same as OEM.

If you can compromise on focus speed then you can get third party lens w/o much compromise in image quality.

 

[Belegost]

I would recommend looking for faster that f/4, that's not a lot of improvement on the f/5.6 OP currently has (which is also faster at shorter focal lengths anyways.)

My suggestion would be the 200mm f/2.8L - even new it's only around $750, so you should be able to find a decent used one for a good price. It's really a deal in the L series.

Admittedly it doesn't have the flexibility of a zoom, but on the crop sensor it's 320mm equivalent, and the wide aperture should be fast enough to avoid too much ISO noise.

 

[Paladin3]

Good basketball lenses are the 85/1.8, 100/2 or 2.5, 135/2 when shot from the floor under or near the basket. On a crop frame body the 50/1.8 you have would be a good lens, but you'd have to get in as close as you can since 75mm isn't that much. 1/500th @ wide open @ iso 3200-6400 is about what to expect in most high school or college gyms. Anything slower than 2.8 will not work.

Nighttime football is pretty dark. 1/500th @ f/2.8 @ 3200-6400 iso is pretty average for most high school or college games at night. 200mm on a crop body would be about as short a lens as you can get away with.

Even for a day game you want to shoot sports wide open, since that gives you a shallow depth of field to help isolate the action. For under $500 bucks, I would look for a used 200/2.8 maybe. That would be a good lens for baseball (infield at least), football and even basketball indoor when shooting at the opposite basket. Use the 50/1.8 you already have for under the net stuff.

And this is all assuming you have reasonable access to the court or field where the game is being played. Down where the other photographers are sitting. Shooting from the stands will make your job a lot harder.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Seconding recommendations for 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2.

 

[RKS]

Thanks for all the great input/ suggestions everyone.

 

[elitejp]

If you have the 55-250 then nothing will beat its performance for under the 600. Keep it.