Downhill Mountain Biking lens choice?

djaphoto

djaphoto

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,528
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
Yes
hi all,

Recently got into photographing my local timed downhill sessions, and wondered what lens might be a good choice?

I did manage a session with my Fuji S3 Pro + Nikon 18-70mm, results below.

But, conditions were fair to me and I was able to get some shots, but when the poorer conditions face me, what would be a good choice?

Primes? 17-70 2.8?

Cheers

Typical shot, as you can get nice and close

p4pb6467512.jpg
 
At the moment I've been using a Tokina 11-16 F2.8, Canon 50 F1.8, Canon 100 F2 and Sigma 70-200 F2.8.

I love using the 100 F2 where I have time and space to setup a nice shot. Its super quick at focusing and is super sharp. During 4X racing I find I tend to use the 70-200 alot more than the prime because it gives you the freedom to take a selection of photos during a single race. For downhill you don't have that problem so I've never found primes to be a problem.
 
Thanks chris,

Might see what primes I can pickup for decent money, although I'm not really sure how much I have at the minute.
 
Personally I tend to use a 70-200 2.8 at about F/4 or 5.6, unless I can't get far enough away to make the sensible. That tend to keep you away from flying stones/bikes/riders.

Really wide, close in stuff also often looks really good, but you need to know where to be! :exit:
 
Already owned a 70-200 2.8 and can't really afford that again, so might look into replacing my Nikon 18-70 with a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4
 
The lenses that I use are a canon 70-20 f2.8, sigma 30mm f 1.4, sigma 105mm f 2.8 macro and a sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6.

Usually try and shoot with the 70-200 most of the time, but in the tree line at likes of innerleithen you need a flash and the 30mm.

Certainly a faster lens does help especially on certain sections of the Fort William course.
 
I've used the 17-70 for a long period of time and found it to be generally very good on my D90 in all but the deepest of woodland!

I've also used my girlfriends Tamron 17-50 fixed F2.8 and found this was a lot better for deeper wood, but I missed the extra 20mm

I did also shoot with a 120-300mm f2.8 but that was far too much length!
 
Cheers for the replies.

I was hoping to get my hands on a sigma 17-70 2.8 for low light as I found with my kit lens 18-70 that 70mm was more than enough really for tight woods.

I'd love another 70-200mm 2.8 but the 300mm prime I have for rallying is far too good to give up so will be keeping that.
 
When i go to races i use my 70-200mm f4 most of the time, looking to upgrade to the 2.8 soon.

And the 50mm 1.4 comes in hand for very low light situations as do the flashes.
 
Thanks for the info :)

Tyler, you are on my pinkbike ;)

I love the 50mm, had a 1.8 previously, but never found much use for it. Might try again though as I find 50mm is a good distance for MTB
 
good lenses/FL for mtb'ing:

15mm 2.8 FE
16-35mm 2.8 (MK2 the mk1 is **** poor)
17-40mm 4
24mm 1.4 if you can afford it the 1.8 i think if not
35mm 1.4 (same as the 24mm above theres a 1.8) or as a second option the sigma 1.4
50mm 1.2 if thats to much money then the Sigma 50mm 1.4
70-200 2.8 (non IS unless its the mk2)
300mm 2.8 (gets very little use but allways good to have just incase)
and finally a lens baby because there awesome

EDIT: just seen after typing this all out you shoot on nikon, never mind
 
Last edited:
Hi, I'm close to Cannock and would live to shoot some more downhill, don't suppose you could tell me what day and time these events occur?

Cheers

Matt
 
Nice shot. The next progression most people make is a zoom lens like the 70-200 Nikon f/2.8. However, since you can get in close, I feel you can be more creative with a wide lens, like the nikon 12-24 f/4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top