newbie- sports question

[N2DFIRE]

I want to purchase a camera for shooting pictures of high school sports, mostly softball. I'm looking at the canon 40D or xsi. I'm leaning towards the 40D because of the faster frames per second. My question what kind of lense. Do I need for getting shots of players from the stands. I want the player to fill most of the picture. Will most of the zoom lenses in the $600 range be fast enough for indoor and outdoor. Shooting the 6 frames a second burst on the canon 40D. Would I better of using the xsi and a $1000 zoom lense and shoot 3.5 frames a second on the xsi. I'm asking what lense do I need to shoot the 6 fps on the 40D indoors and outdoors and have the player fill most of the frame. I want the higher fps of the 40D over the xsi, because I want to capture the most frames that I can during a pitch. My daughter pitches and I would like to use the frames to help with her technique.

[dhyravy]

The lens won't have any effect on the fps. If you are going to only shoot outdoors in daylight then pretty much any decent zoom will get it done. Since this is a daughter, I'm assuming softball pitching so you'll want at least 200mm on the long end. When lens speed is referred to it is in reference to the aperture or amount of light it can capture. Faster lenses are mainly for low light situations. Also, better lenses keep a constant aperture throughout the zoom range. (i.e. f2.8 as opposed to f3.5 - 5.6) Pro/fast glass is the way to go if you don't mind spending the $$$$ but a 70-200mm f2.8 will set you back about $1800.

[N2DFIRE]

with a cheaper zoom lens of with aperture of f4-f5 a "so called slower lens". Do use a longer exposure with so called slower lens in low light "indoors". if so does this decrease your ability to capture 6fps or is 6fps only possible on a lens with a lower aperture indoors.

[dhyravy]

Indoors the slower lens will cause you to use a lower shutter speed which will result in less fps. In most HS gyms, you'll be lucky to get a shot without motion blur with a f4/f5 lens. Even with flash (which won't allow continuous shutter anyway) it will be tough to get clean shots with those lenses.

[gryphonslair99]

If it was me, trying to stay close to your budget, Well kinda close anyway, I would look at the 40D and the 70-200 f2.8 non IS. About a $2200.00 outlay. IS has little value in sports shooting but if you need/want IS for other types of photography then it would be worth the extra money. The 70-200 series from Canon is one outstanding series of lenses. If you do not plan on needing the speed for indoor shooting then look at the 70-200 f4. Outstanding optical quality.

The 70-200 f2.8 is the minimum aperture I would want for indoor sports and rarely use something that slow as it is tough to achieve a minimum of 1/320th of a second. I prefer 1/500th minimum but can get away with 1/320th and freeze action.

If you really want to fill the frame with your daughter then either this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_2_8L.html
Or this would be the way to go.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_2_8L.html

I love them both but the 400 definately gets more use.

[tward88]

My daughter is also a softball pitcher. One thing to keep in mind is some of the softball games will be under the lights. Which means a low light situation. Which means you need a faster lens.
I was frustrated last summer shooting with a slower zoom lens, as our HS girls always play double headers The first is generally well lit but by the second games the field lights are on and it becomes much harder to shoot with a slow lens. I went with the tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 which is less than half the cost of the high end nikon with the same specs, and have been very happy with th eperformance. I use it for indoor volleyabll as well as softball.

All that siad, if you are looking for a way to help her with her technique, a video camera would be a much better investment

[mattbikeboy]

with a cheaper zoom lens of with aperture of f4-f5 a "so called slower lens". Do use a longer exposure with so called slower lens in low light "indoors". if so does this decrease your ability to capture 6fps or is 6fps only possible on a lens with a lower aperture indoors.

Yes it will, but only because a slow lens will have a hard time being able to focus at all. A fast pro lens has the ability to open the aperture wider to allow more light in -- they also focus faster. You will also want a new body that shoots well at high ISOs.

Don't worry about 6 frames per second indoors (unless you want to go drop 10k+ on a pro body and really fast glass).

Fast FPS is great outdoors when the action is poppin'. But then you get other issues-- like you're camera maintaining focus on a moving object (many don't). Even in sports, a super fast frame rate isn't everything.
mbb

[SmartWombat]

The most important thing will be wide aperture (f/2.8) lenses, not the fps.
If you just machine gun them with fast frame rate, I think your chances of getting a good photo decrease.
If you practice and learn to time your shots, you'll get better results.

The exception is where there is an obvious sequence, someone being run out for example. Or a gymnast's dismount.

What matters for sharpness, after the lens, is the shutter speed you can achieve in the low light. Not how many blurry shots you can take per second (I speak from experience here!).
So if you're shooting indoors low light (and that's not just what looks dark to you) will be your main problem.
For that you need the widest aperture you can get, to get lower shutter speeds to stop the action while using a low enough ISO to avoid noise.

If you can mange 1/250 second shutter speed, and you get 6fps ... then that's 6/250 of action you captured, and 244 that you missed or about 40:1. If you're after the moment, do you have more chance of missing it, or capturing it?

[Joe_09]

The thing to remember when buying lenses is, big apertures = big money. If you want to freeze action indoors with little available light (assuming you can't or don't choose to use a flash, which is only good out to about 15-20 feet anyway) you will have to choose between focal lengths with the lowest f setting you can afford. You can get f1.4 or f1.8 (big aperture "fast" lenses in shorter focal lengths (50mm-80mm) for under $1000 but you won't have any reach. Once you start climbing to big apetures, plus longer focal lengths, you can easily get into several thousands of dollars. That's why you see the pro's on the sidelines with those monstrous telephotos. I have a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 ($700) with my Canon 50D which I plan to try out at an indoor track meet tomorrow. I'm hoping with this combo and a 3200 ISO I can get some decent shutter speeds. Good luck.

[rhondalane]

Joe- Just wondering how the Tamron 70-200 worked out on that track meet? I am looking for a lens for low/indoor lighting to use with our Canon 40D. We do soccer and softball/baseball outdoor, but would have loved to get our girls playing indoor soccer this winter. Just cant afford the $4000 range!