Indoor Sports - What Would You Use?

[PaulBoy]

Hi - I recently tried my hand at taking sports shots indoors (at Calshot Veladrome nr Southampton) - I got a few half decent shots (which I posted HERE in the Transport Forum) - I intend to go back again & was hoping for some help from the Forum as to how to up the rate of "keepers"?
Ally mentioned that even if I'd taken my 105mm f2.8 that probably still wouldn't be bright enough & mentioned using f1.8 & f1.4 primes - Ally also mentioned a combo of flash & 70-200mm f2.8's used by sports 'togs
I remember seeing a great set JoeT did of Ice Hockey - I'd be interested to hear what you used Joe & what the light was like in the venue (presumably pretty good as I don't remember you mentioning using flash at all)
FWIW the light inside Calshot is dire (think big metal barn with a panel at the top letting in light - as per pic1 on the linked thread) Most shots were over ISO1000
So what would you suggest? I don't have a decent flash or a f1.anything prime or should I give the 105mm f2.8 (which is VR btw) a chance before hitting the "Kerso Speed-Dial" button again? :embarrassed:
Thanks for looking in ... Paul

 

[Joe T]

Hi Paul!

I use a Sigma 120-300 2.8, but a 70-200 2.8 would be a better option.
ISO needs to be high, at least ISO 800.

Ice hockey arenas appear to be fairly well lit, but they arent when you actually try using a camera!

I dont use flash, as thats not really appropriate imo!

Dont use the 105mm, I dont think it would AF fast enough. TBH, I cant really see anything in your kit that would be appropriate, sorry! :shrug:

 

[PaulBoy]

Hi Paul!

I use a Sigma 120-300 2.8, but a 70-200 2.8 would be a better option.
ISO needs to be high, at least ISO 800.

Ice hockey arenas appear to be fairly well lit, but they arent when you actually try using a camera!

I dont use flash, as thats not really appropriate imo!

Dont use the 105mm, I dont think it would AF fast enough. TBH, I cant really see anything in your kit that would be appropriate, sorry! :shrug:

Cheers Joe - I'm interested in why you say not to use the 105mm 2.8 when you said you used a f2.8 120-300? - Perhaps you think it is the reach issue but there isn't one as I am on the track & can feel the breeze as the riders whizz by! Or perhaps you meant on the AF side but the Nikon 105mm VR has AF-S & SWM and is therefore no slouch in the focusing side ...
I agree with the flash comment - I didn't want to cause a crash!!!
The only lens I would consider adding (I know none of mine fit the bill for indoor sports) for allround photog would be a 50mm prime f1.8 or f1.4? I had a f2.8 80-200mm but it got little use due to its size & weight - I'm sure I'll get more use out of the 70-300mm I replaced it with even if its not much use in this scenario ...
Paul

 

[Ally]

Hi Paul, I think your fine perhaps Something like a 50 or 85 1.8 or 1.4 will be good for you so that you can take the aperture down if you have to. Thinking now flash is prob not a good idea, I've seen it used in olympic time trials but thats a diffrent world. Please share your next set

 

[oldgit]

A bloody big flood light strapped to your back
(and the above)

 

[Joe T]

Or perhaps you meant on the AF side but the Nikon 105mm VR has AF-S & SWM and is therefore no slouch in the focusing side ...

SWM and AF-S are the same thing btw.

I dont think it will focus fast because its designed as a macro lens. Macro lneses have very long focus distances in terms of barrel movement. This is required so that it can focus more precisely than any other lens. The AF on my Sigma 105mm which has HSM (the Sigma equiv) focuses incredibly slowly.

 

[EOS_JD]

Dead right with the slow AF on Macro lenses. My Canon 100mm f2.8 focuses fine in normal light but lower the light level and it hunts around. All macro lenses are the same afaik. I too would suggest something like a 70-200 f2.8 or perhaps something like a 135 f2 (do Nikon do one of these?).

ISO would need to be high to get decent shutter speeds. Also you may not be permitted to use flash. Sportsmen generally don't like flash being used as it catches the eye and puts them off. Check with the venue before considering this.

 

[PaulBoy]

Hi Paul, I think your fine perhaps Something like a 50 or 85 1.8 or 1.4 will be good for you so that you can take the aperture down if you have to. Thinking now flash is prob not a good idea, I've seen it used in olympic time trials but thats a diffrent world. Please share your next set

Cheers Ally (must resist more expenditure :bang

I dont think it will focus fast because its designed as a macro lens. Macro lneses have very long focus distances in terms of barrel movement. This is required so that it can focus more precisely than any other lens. The AF on my Sigma 105mm which has HSM (the Sigma equiv) focuses incredibly slowly

Joe - Must bow to your greater knowledge (again) - I may just try the 105mm next time to convince myself (& save my wallet!)

A bloody big flood light strapped to your back
(and the above)

OldG - Or hope its sunny next time


Thanks everyone ... Paul

 

[EOS_JD]

The 105 should focus in good light for a portrait but trying to follow motion is not what it was made for. If you are looking at that sort of range, the 85 f1.8 would be a great lens.

 

[shiato storm]

get an arc lighting system (used in mountain biking) and blind everyone as you light them up for a shot

 

[sonny]

The older nikon 80-200 f2.8 is a great lens too

 

[paulc]

The older nikon 80-200 f2.8 is a great lens too

I have this lens, the two touch version and I find it brilliant indoors, I was asked to take some pictures of a ministrada gymnastics display for my daughters club and used this lens and it was superb on my d70, i didn't realise just how capable this lens was indoors, but I was also pleasantly surprised by the 18-70 kit lens that came with the d70, but as Joe says the iso needs to be cranked up.