Lens Question

[LoudPicture]

I recently began shooting for my school newspaper, and also decided to start non-"extreme" sports photography (Football, soccer, lax, etc). However, obvious, neither my 18-55 mm lens, nor my fisheye lens will do the job. So well, out of curiousity, i hoped onto Ritz Camera's website and found a Quantaray 600-1000mm lens for only $279.00
(found here: http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/25...ses-for-pentax)

This is a giant lens i know, and i beleive it will do the job quite niceley, but ive got a few concerns. The first is if it will take me too close. 600mm is already very close, could it possibly be too close?

The other one that i have been looking at, is about half the price, and is much smaller. This would be the Pentax Pentax 75-300mm.
(found here: http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/54...ses-for-pentax)

So, the main question is, if its ideal for such photography?

Because of ridiculously overpriced items, i wont be buying from ritz, so that shall not be a factor.

[BLS439]

Well here's the spec's from the first link you attached.
# Focal Length: 600-1000mm
# Focus Type: Manual
# Zoom Type: One Touch
# Zoom Effect: 12X-20X
# Aperture Range: F:9.9-16
# Optical Construction: 4 Elements in 2 Groups
# Angle of View: 4.1 degrees -2.5 degrees
# Minimum Focus: 14.4 ft. at 600-1000mm
# Lens Coating: Fully Coated
# Grip: Knurled
# Finish: Non-Reflective
# Size: 12.875 x 3.25 inches
# Weight: 29.5 Ounces (840 grams)
# Filter Size: 72mm

You're only going to have manual focus with that lens, it's not AF capable. Also, it's a really slow lens. Meaning you are going to need lots and lots of light to use it. You basically will have to stick with lighting condition similar to "hazy 11" or "sunny 16". That means it's pretty much only good for bright daylight shooting. Now, you may be able to push the ISO really high to get a decent shutter speed in lower (not low) light conditions.

The second lens you list is *better than the first. Well, atleast it's capable of being better with it's max f4.5.

If I were in your shoes I'd save a little more $ until you have about $500. Then look for a used 70-200 f/4 or check out the sigma 70-200's. For school sports, a 70-200 is just about perfect. I recall using a 100-300 for a little while and it served well.

Good Luck!

[JSPhoto]

There are a number of threads such as this one and you left out some information for us to really help you. Things such as what camera your using. Also, will you be shooting day or evening/night games?
The 600-1000 is a bit much unless shooting from the other end of the field. It's a slow lens so it won't be helpful at night. Your best bet is a lens in the 70-200 range and an f2.8 minimum for night. The cheapest you will find is a Sigma for around $650. A good flash will also help as well.

JS

[LoudPicture]

Sorry guys, i was a bit tired when posting this.

Im shooting with a pentax *ist DL. The games will vary from day to night games. I have a great flash. However, I still feel that 200mm is a bit small, i have used one before, and it just doesnt feel big enough. But maybe 300mm would do it? I would really like to be able to have a nice close shot from the sidelines.

Thanks a lot everyone, i really appreciate it.

[livin4lax09]

lenses that are that cheap only mean one thing...stacked converters, and poor glass. don't waste your money. and f/9.9 wide open? yikes, you'd only be able to use this thing in direct sun. buy a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens, throw a 1.4x teleconverter on it, and you'll be fine. I really think the most you need for sports is 500mm. And that's even a little close for comfort. if you went with a 600mm at the widest end, I can tell you that you'd have a hard time shooting lacrosse. 200-300mm nabs the best shots if you can plant yourself on a corner of the field. the pentax 75-300mm lens is the same as every other 75-300mm lens. fine for a starter, but not ideal for sports photography at all. I know you're tempted to buy, but trust me when i say wait out. buy a sigma 70-200mm used, find a 1.4x sigma teleconverter, and you're golden for the sports you list. Of course, it will require more money, but if you're not wanting to spend a lot of money, my suggestion is to get out of team sports photography ASAP because there's no such thing as cheap sports photography equipment. My equipment bag is worth about 3 grand, and JS, SW, and OT will probably all tell you that theirs is worth even more.

[LoudPicture]

Thanks lax for the info. Yeah, i went into this crazy hobby knowing that i would be spending money left and right on equiptment. Ill look into everything you guys said, and make my decisions from there. Thanks again.

-dan

[CWatsonJr]

Just a note about the teleconverter... it takes away the f/2.8 and sets it f/4.5 (I think somewhere around there). That will hinder your night football games.

The nice thing... you can take it off and get f/2.8