Motorsport Lens Question Again.

[Knikki]

I have a Canon crop sensor camera and looking for a lens to cover Motorsport. Mainly it will be around Oulton Park but thinking of going off to other places.

Looking for a lens for longer reach. Really looking for a zoom something round:
75-300 f4-f5.6
100-400 f4-f5.6
Maybe a 70-200 (but already have Nikon version so don't want to duplicate, yes I have too much gear )

Canon, Sigma, Tamron will happily consider any manufacture the only thing I really want is that the longest end it needs to be f5.6.

Thanks

 

[troutfisher]

Some time ago I was at Harewood Hill climb stsnding next to a semi retired pro tog.
He was using a Canon 300 f2.8 , a bit battered but it was his go to money making lens for motor sport.
If thats out then a 300 f4 is, takes a 1.4 tc very well and retains af.

 

[Deleted member 26215]

A 75-300 lens is more than adequate at Oulton Park, unless of course you are wanting to take head-on shots at the chicanes.

 

[moggi1964]

Nick,

I have tickets for BSB at Oulton in September and plan to use my 40-150 F/2,8 with the 1.4 TC on my Olympus EM1 MkII. It'll be the first time as last time I was there I had the 50-200mm on the E30 4/3 lens and that did a brilliant job. So 400mm equivalent. I think the 75-300 will be fine on your APS.

In response to j crossley's point about head on at chicanes, you could always pick up an inexpensive manual lens of 400 to 500mm FL to have in the bag. If the 300mm isn't cutting it you'll have some extra reach for little money.

 

[wack61]

The Canon 400 5.6l is a brilliant lens for Motorsport if you want more reach , light and sharp, buy a good used one and ownership costs can be zero

 

[Knikki]

Some time ago I was at Harewood Hill climb stsnding next to a semi retired pro tog.
He was using a Canon 300 f2.8 , a bit battered but it was his go to money making lens for motor sport.
If thats out then a 300 f4 is, takes a 1.4 tc very well and retains af.

I used to have an old manual focus Nikon 300mm f2.8 and it was fab but damn heavy and found it tricky to use on AF cameras so sold it (yes wish I had not) I have looked at the Canon 300mm f2.8 but its just out my budget at the moment, still will keep my eye open for one, Thanks

A 75-300 lens is more than adequate at Oulton Park, unless of course you are wanting to take head-on shots at the chicanes.

Thanks, I was thinking that and it is what I am leaning towards, Know what you mean about the chicane.

Nick,

I have tickets for BSB at Oulton in September and plan to use my 40-150 F/2,8 with the 1.4 TC on my Olympus EM1 MkII. It'll be the first time as last time I was there I had the 50-200mm on the E30 4/3 lens and that did a brilliant job. So 400mm equivalent. I think the 75-300 will be fine on your APS.

In response to j crossley's point about head on at chicanes, you could always pick up an inexpensive manual lens of 400 to 500mm FL to have in the bag. If the 300mm isn't cutting it you'll have some extra reach for little money.

Funny I have that similar M4/3 combo but with a OMD 5 MkII (told you I had to much gear) and have used it and yes it does work very well the 1.4x is great, I picked up a x 2 convetor as well BUT I really need to sort my techinque out to get the best from it. Thanks.

The Canon 400 5.6l is a brilliant lens for Motorsport if you want more reach , light and sharp, buy a good used one and ownership costs can be zero

I have my eye on one of those and tempted but feel that a zoom up to 400 would be move flexable if not using it for motor sport, but you have got me thinking again about one . Thanks.

 

[wack61]

I have my eye on one of those and tempted but feel that a zoom up to 400 would be move flexable if not using it for motor sport, but you have got me thinking again about one . Thanks.

It would but they're incredibly sharp , if you're getting a zoom that goes to 300mm I'd get the 400 5.6 , once you taken a few pictures you'll see what I mean

 

[RichardC27]

I have a Canon crop sensor camera and looking for a lens to cover Motorsport. Mainly it will be around Oulton Park but thinking of going off to other places.

Looking for a lens for longer reach. Really looking for a zoom something round:
75-300 f4-f5.6
100-400 f4-f5.6
Maybe a 70-200 (but already have Nikon version so don't want to duplicate, yes I have too much gear )

Canon, Sigma, Tamron will happily consider any manufacture the only thing I really want is that the longest end it needs to be f5.6.

Thanks

The Tamron 100-400mm lens is well reviewed, basically as sharp and as good AF performance as the Canon 100-400 for less than half the price. You do lose 1/3rd of a stop of light at the long end as it's only f6.3 but in the real world you'd never notice the difference. It will still AF on any EOS body, There's a couple of Dustin Abbot videos about it on YouTube that are well worth a look where he compares it directly to the Canon lens.

 

[andrewc]

Sigma 120-300 f/2.8?

 

[Gadget-Guy]

Trackside i used a MKII 300 f2.8 and a MKII 500 f4 for bikes and found the 300 always had a 1.4 tc on it and the 500 was a little long. If you get a good copy of the 400 f5.6 its a stella little lens to be fair and i used one for a year on a 1DX with some great results as i sold my 400 f2.8 IS due to weight and funding both the 300 and 500 lenses. Owned the 400 5.6 for i think 4 years in total and lost £50 off my original purchase price when i sold it. If you go for the 400 f5.6 extend the lens hood and check inside all the felt is intact as the have a tendency to wear away with use and although it doesn't seem to effect performance you could probably knock a bit off the asking price.

 

[wack61]

Sigma 120-300 f/2.8?

Absolutely brilliant IQ but very heavy and the AF isn't great for motorsport, OK at panning but if something is coming towards you at speed it just can't keep up

 

[Knikki]

Well quick update, thank you all for your comments and certainly a fair bit to think about. However I ended up getting a Canon 100-400 L lens because, it is one of those lens I have lusted after for some time (don't know why but I'm sure we all lust after some kit or other ). I do like primes but felt the zoom would give me a little more flexability, saying that, I'm now lusting after a Canon 400mm f4 DO lens .
So if anyone is at Outlon tomorrow, sees a guy wondering around not knowing what he is doing, it might be me

 

[andrewc]

Absolutely brilliant IQ but very heavy and the AF isn't great for motorsport, OK at panning but if something is coming towards you at speed it just can't keep up

Heavy, yes.
Disagree with the other comments. I've upped the focus speed on mine with the Sigma dock, and has no trouble keeping up with racing cars. However, 1D cameras run at a higher voltage to 7D, so more 'oomf' for the focus motors to use.

 

[wack61]

didn't realise there was a new one, the one I had was probably 10 years old 10 years ago

3.4kg though , by the end of the day that'll be like carrying thors hammer

 

[A_S]

Hi

Sorry to drag this thread back up. I am in a similar situation but not sure where to go with a new lens for motorsport.

Many many years ago (talking 15 or so) I used to shoot trackside on an EOS 20D with a 70-200 F4 and 300 F4L, plus a 1.4x TC on both.

Fast forward 15 years or so and I am now behind the fences, but enjoying going to events again... I still have the above mentioned lenses but on an R5 without the crop factor and with bigger run offs (especially at silverstone) and thick(er) fences than back in the day when i was behind them...

I see a lot of fairly bog standard photos from behind the fences and want something to get that little bit closer or something a little bit different.... However I can't really think/find anything that would beat the kit I already have.

The 400 F5.6 doesn't really offer me anything as I already have the 300 f4 plus TC. A TC on the 400 F5.6 - I don't think would auto focus, and would make it an F8 (I think) which as a max aperture may be too high DOF for the fences and lacking too much light for the UK.... so thats out.

A 100-400 again doesn't really offer me anything over the 300 F4 as I can cover that range and more at an equivalent aperture.

The new RF 100-500 is appealing but again the high max aperture especially if you put a TC on it gives me the same problems as the 300 F4 with DoF and lack of light even if the range is more what I am looking for.

The only thing I can really think of as being a benefit here would be a big and heavy 500 F4 but even used that are really expensive!

Can anyone offer any other suggestions?

 

[andrewc]

Sigma 150-600mm with a mount adaptor?

 

[A_S]

That’s a good shout - is the sports version quick enough?

I know sigma have come on a lot in the last few years. I know people who used to shoot with the 50-500 and when I tried it I wasn’t impressed but like I say that was a long time ago

 

[andrewc]

Quite a few photographers use with good effect. Without spending thousands on a 400mm f/2.8 or a 500/600mm, you'll get compromises.

Sport is heavier than the Contemporary. The Sigma Dock may improve AF speed (at expense of potential accuracy).

I have a 120-300 f/2.8 Sport and its great. Great but heavy.

 

[David Stallard]

My lenses of choice when working are the 70-200 2.8 mkII with the mk3 1.4 extender (90% of the time) also use the 200-400 f4 with built in extender. Wife uses the Tamron 150-600 G2 (handheld) and has some awesome race shots with it.

DAVID.

 

[G-Slev]

I used a chappy sigma 70-300 apo for years with my 400D. It's a truly awful lens, but I got some great shots with it - and it only cost me £50!

These days, I use a tamron 150 to 600 which is really sharp considering the range. I also gave a tamron 70-300 which is very soft at wider apertures (not sure if it is just my copy that is suspect). It sharpens up a lot once I crang the aperture down.

I never use vibration compensation on the tamrons for panning - it's not designed for it, and it'll ruin your shots.

I shoot quite a bit with slow shutter speeds and a Canon 15-85.

 

[tangerine_sedge]

I'm a great fan of Canon primes, so for me it's a 50mm for Paddock (I sometimes use wider depending on shot) and 200mmf2.8 or 400mmf5.6 for on track action depending upon the circuit.

I used a lot of cheaper zooms and 2x extenders when I was young and poor, but just became frustrated by their lack of sharpness. If I get a blurry picture now, I know it's my technique and not the equipment

Just to add - I tend crop very lightly in post production just to tighten up the image, but I don't do a lot of post processing other than that.

 

[Knikki]

I'm a great fan of Canon primes, so for me it's a 50mm for Paddock (I sometimes use wider depending on shot) and 200mmf2.8 or 400mmf5.6 for on track action depending upon the circuit.

I used a lot of cheaper zooms and 2x extenders when I was young and poor, but just became frustrated by their lack of sharpness. If I get a blurry picture now, I know it's my technique and not the equipment

Just to add - I tend crop very lightly in post production just to tighten up the image, but I don't do a lot of post processing other than that.

I have seriously looked at the Canon 200mm but for Oulton, where I mostly shoot, just having a 200 would be a little restrictive in some of the corners.
Slightly wider, like down around the 100-150 would be better, so maybe a 80-200 f4 is on the cards

 

[tangerine_sedge]

I have seriously looked at the Canon 200mm but for Oulton, where I mostly shoot, just having a 200 would be a little restrictive in some of the corners.
Slightly wider, like down around the 100-150 would be better, so maybe a 80-200 f4 is on the cards

The 200/f2.8 is a peach of a lens. For on track action, I don't think I'd ever go shorter than 200, but then I'm usually on the spectator side of the barrier.

 

[Knikki]

The 200/f2.8 is a peach of a lens. For on track action, I don't think I'd ever go shorter than 200, but then I'm usually on the spectator side of the barrier.

Oh same here, but there are a couple of places in Oulton, from the spectators side where 200 is just a little to long but the again at other tracks it is just enough

But you have now got me thinking about that lens again

 

[G-Slev]

Oh same here, but there are a couple of places in Oulton, from the spectators side where 200 is just a little to long but the again at other tracks it is just enough

But you have now got me thinking about that lens again

I used to think that, but for slow shutter speed stuff, I find the canon 15 to 85 fabulous.

That said, I have toyed with the idea of the 200 f/2.8. it's a cheap prime that is known to be fantastically sharp

 

[Tysonator]

Well quick update, thank you all for your comments and certainly a fair bit to think about. However I ended up getting a Canon 100-400 L lens because, it is one of those lens I have lusted after for some time (don't know why but I'm sure we all lust after some kit or other ). I do like primes but felt the zoom would give me a little more flexability, saying that, I'm now lusting after a Canon 400mm f4 DO lens .
So if anyone is at Outlon tomorrow, sees a guy wondering around not knowing what he is doing, it might be me

IMO, I would buy the 100-400L Mkii as the MKi is a little soft in IQ were as the Mkii is very sharp. Plus it is quicker to snap to focus. I do appreciate it is more expensive to buy used, however it is a very good lens which you will keep for ever and it works very well on RF mirrrorless ! !
A friend of mind had the 100-400L Mki and then purchased MKii and I liked the MKii a lot !

Personnel I have EF 70-300L IS USM and that is a quick snap to focus, plus it is sharp and if I really need extra reach I have a sigma 150-600 Contemporary

 

[tangerine_sedge]

I

I used to think that, but for slow shutter speed stuff, I find the canon 15 to 85 fabulous.

That said, I have toyed with the idea of the 200 f/2.8. it's a cheap prime that is known to be fantastically sharp

I've just looked at some of your 15-85 stuff on your flickr account. I went to the same race day, but never used my short lens (I didn't even take it). I'll pack it next time and try something different as your pictures are ace. I've become set in my ways, so it's time to switch it up a little. As someone once said - every day is a school day!

 

[G-Slev]

I

I've just looked at some of your 15-85 stuff on your flickr account. I went to the same race day, but never used my short lens (I didn't even take it). I'll pack it next time and try something different as your pictures are ace. I've become set in my ways, so it's time to switch it up a little. As someone once said - every day is a school day!

Yeah, I got like that too (though I would say I still take the same images 90% of the time!)

I was thinking that we should probably start a thread on here for arty/different shots to give people some inspiration?

 

[Knikki]

I used to think that, but for slow shutter speed stuff, I find the canon 15 to 85 fabulous.

Had a look at your stuff with the 15-85, really nice and well caputured, your panning technique is better than mine.

As for shorter lens, I have a Canon 28-105 that I use for some of the slow shots I try, find it works well also good for walking around the paddock with.

However I am warming to the idea of the 200mm.

 

[Knikki]

IMO, I would buy the 100-400L Mkii as the MKi is a little soft in IQ were as the Mkii is very sharp. Plus it is quicker to snap to focus. I do appreciate it is more expensive to buy used, however it is a very good lens which you will keep for ever and it works very well on RF mirrrorless ! !
A friend of mind had the 100-400L Mki and then purchased MKii and I liked the MKii a lot !

Personnel I have EF 70-300L IS USM and that is a quick snap to focus, plus it is sharp and if I really need extra reach I have a sigma 150-600 Contemporary

You have some good points, but I am finding the MkI lens I have works really well for me but the imporved AF and IS would be nice to have from the MkII.

However, at the moment I am looking at other stuff, so a jump to the MkII will have to wait a bit

 

[Mr Badger]

Maybe have a look at the SIGMA 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM, bearing in mind a lot of the earlier reviews tested the lens before it got a firmware update that included a tweak to the focusing system. Once I'd fine tuned the focus on mine (using the Sigma dock, easy enough to do but a bit time consuming) it seems to work well. It's also quite a bit lighter than the Canon 100-400 L Mk II, which may be a consideration.

If I could justify the cost I'd go for the Canon 100-400 L II. If it were between a used Canon 100-400 L Mk 1 and the Sigma 100-400, I'd go for the Sigma. Perhaps check out the used price for a 'mint-ish' Sigma from a reputable shop/internet dealer and give it some thought?

 

[Brendan Mulachy]

has anyone shot at Aintree, they have bike racing on all day Saturday, is it worth my whilst trying to get some shots on a 70-200 or will it not have enough reach, i could chuck it on a crop sensor camera to give me a little bit more reach if that would help if not its only a tenner and il just enjoy the racing

 

[G-Slev]

has anyone shot at Aintree, they have bike racing on all day Saturday, is it worth my whilst trying to get some shots on a 70-200 or will it not have enough reach, i could chuck it on a crop sensor camera to give me a little bit more reach if that would help if not its only a tenner and il just enjoy the racing

I haven't been to aintree, but I managed with a crappy 70 to 300 for years (it was the cheap sigma apo one). When I am at the track, I use a range of focal lengths, all the way down to about 40/50mm so I am sure you would get some usable shots with a 70 to 300.