Sports photography lens recommendations

To those that have experience in this area: can you recommend a lens that would be a good choice for sports photography. I'm not talking about brands here but rather factors like focal length, max aperture, that sort of thing and why you'd go with that choice. I'd love to hear what my fellow forumites are using.

Football season will be kicking off soon (no pun intended) and I'm thinking of shooting some of the matches but I have no experience in sports photography.

Sports/Action/Wildlife is the toughest discipline in photography. In every other field, you can try again. You can ask the subjects to pose for you again. In Sports/Action/Wildlife, you do the best you can with what you brought.

I use a Tokina 100-300mm f/4.0 lens, and it works very well. The constant maximum aperture means that the exposure settings would change with the focal length, and zoom lenses with constant maximum apertures tend to be sharper than zoom lenses with variable maximum apertures.

For outdoor sports, you'll need something with a maximum focal length of about 300mm if you're shooting from the sidelines. If you're shooting from the stands, you'll need something longer, and that comes with the potential of irritating the other spectators around you, so I discourage that.

For indoor sports, a 70-200 f/2.8 lens would work well, again getting as close to the players as possible.

TCav wrote: Sports/Action/Wildlife is the toughest discipline in photography. In every other field, you can try again. You can ask the subjects to pose for you again. In Sports/Action/Wildlife, you do the best you can with what you brought.

I use a Tokina 100-300mm f/4.0 lens, and it works very well. The constant maximum aperture means that the exposure settings would change with the focal length, and zoom lenses with constant maximum apertures tend to be sharper than zoom lenses with variable maximum apertures.

For outdoor sports, you'll need something with a maximum focal length of about 300mm if you're shooting from the sidelines. If you're shooting from the stands, you'll need something longer, and that comes with the potential of irritating the other spectators around you, so I discourage that.

For indoor sports, a 70-200 f/2.8 lens would work well, again getting as close to the players as possible.

Thanks. I'll be shooting the local footie club so the viewer stands are relatively small. I think sideline shooting will be the way to go here.

I have Brutus (my sigma 150-600) which I thought I might use. But it's really heavy and the auto focus isn't the quickest so I may just get something else.

TCav wrote: Sports/Action/Wildlife is the toughest discipline in photography. In every other field, you can try again. You can ask the subjects to pose for you again. In Sports/Action/Wildlife, you do the best you can with what you brought.

I use a Tokina 100-300mm f/4.0 lens, and it works very well. The constant maximum aperture means that the exposure settings would change with the focal length, and zoom lenses with constant maximum apertures tend to be sharper than zoom lenses with variable maximum apertures.

For outdoor sports, you'll need something with a maximum focal length of about 300mm if you're shooting from the sidelines. If you're shooting from the stands, you'll need something longer, and that comes with the potential of irritating the other spectators around you, so I discourage that.

For indoor sports, a 70-200 f/2.8 lens would work well, again getting as close to the players as possible.

Alos, what are your thoughts re prime vs zoom?

Esseff wrote: Alos, what are your thoughts re prime vs zoom?

Your call.

Long telephoto lenses are what sports photographers use a lot, especially for outdoor field sports. I've done mostly hockey and some basketball from ice/floor level so usually have used a short telephoto.

You'll need a sharp lens. Maybe try buying used to get a better lens at an affordable price. And you'll need to be shooting a lot at a fast shutter speed to freeze action. I use primes, but a lot of sports photographers use zooms.

Much of shooting sports is knowing the sport. Anticipate action, which way is the play likely to go next? I like to be ahead of the play and let the players skate into my viewfinder. Sometimes right before the play turns to go another direction I've found can be a good moment to get a shot.

Go early, find good vantage points. Notice backgrounds. Move your feet - meaning you are not glued to planet earth, move and change your vantage spot as needed to catch the action.

Starting out have fun and keep learning. If you go often enough you'll probably get to know staff (ushers, etc.) who will get used to you being there and may be helpful as the season goes along.

Did I miss what sort of budget?  After all budget can quickly exclude certain options. 

Paris Gal wrote: Did I miss what sort of budget?  After all budget can quickly exclude certain options. 

Haven't given budget much thought yet. I'll prolly go with Sigma since I have two already and I'm very happy with the quality I'm getting. Sigma's are decently priced.

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports: This lens offers a long zoom range (assuming you have under 100mm handled already) and a fast maximum aperture of f/2.8, making it a versatile option for capturing sports action. Plus with this being Sigma, will cost less than Sony alternatives.

Sorry I repeated some of what I said in this and your other thread! Get a nice sharp lens; an f4 may not do the job. But don't spend a lot til you see how you like doing this. You could always sell and upgrade down the road.

70-200mm f/2.8 and call it a day

70-200/2.8 is good for indoor sports (Basketball, Volleyball) from the stands, or hockey down at the ice, but for anything else, especially outdoors, you'll need something longer. To 300mm for APS-C from the sidelines, and longer from the stands or with 'Full Frame'.

And to be absolutely clear, those $400 70-300/4.5-6.3 lenses aren't nearly good enough.