New lens, and how fast a one for motorsport?
Discussion
We bought a Canon 500D last year with the usual EF-S kit lens (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS). It's my first foray into non compact digital photography, so I've spent the best part of 6 months playing with the camera and relearning stuff I learnt in physics a long time ago about optics, aperatures, focal lengths etc etc.
I'm coming to the point now in investing in a new lens, and given primarily most of the shots I do are outside and often longer distance typical touristy type photos am considering a telephoto one. A bit of a catalyst for it is going to Silverstone in a months time for the GP, so I'm considering whether I want a fast lens or just keep to a sensible budget. Is a f/2.8 or faster really necessary for motorsport shots if your stuck up in the grandstands or in the general admission areas (ie not close to the action!)? I'm looking at a few other makes as well, such as seeing the £55 Tamron 70-300 f4 shots in apguy's Bentwaters thread. Half the problem is I have no budget limitations as such. The budget is more defined by what's sensible for an amateur photographer to spend. I could spend close to 4 figures (through gritted teeth) on an very nice bit of glass but I'm 100% certain it would be a complete waste of cash for me and my photography skills! But will I notice if its a £50 one that's much slower than somewhere in between and worth about the same as the camera body?
Got to say the lens thread/wiki is/was a good idea, I've spent a bit of time looking at it.
Only final comment is I don't intend to carry around a whole bunch of lenses so a group of prime lenses aren't much use to me, my thoughts are I'd probably be better with a slightly compromised all-in-one lens.
I'm coming to the point now in investing in a new lens, and given primarily most of the shots I do are outside and often longer distance typical touristy type photos am considering a telephoto one. A bit of a catalyst for it is going to Silverstone in a months time for the GP, so I'm considering whether I want a fast lens or just keep to a sensible budget. Is a f/2.8 or faster really necessary for motorsport shots if your stuck up in the grandstands or in the general admission areas (ie not close to the action!)? I'm looking at a few other makes as well, such as seeing the £55 Tamron 70-300 f4 shots in apguy's Bentwaters thread. Half the problem is I have no budget limitations as such. The budget is more defined by what's sensible for an amateur photographer to spend. I could spend close to 4 figures (through gritted teeth) on an very nice bit of glass but I'm 100% certain it would be a complete waste of cash for me and my photography skills! But will I notice if its a £50 one that's much slower than somewhere in between and worth about the same as the camera body?
Got to say the lens thread/wiki is/was a good idea, I've spent a bit of time looking at it.
Only final comment is I don't intend to carry around a whole bunch of lenses so a group of prime lenses aren't much use to me, my thoughts are I'd probably be better with a slightly compromised all-in-one lens.
Hi, It's not so much the wide aperture (although clearly useful) that the expensive lens offers, it's the quality of the image, sharpness, lack of aberration, contrast, build quality, sealing, however you measure quality.
I'm in the process of trading from a Sigma 24-70 to a Nikon 24-70 for all the reasons above!
Usual mantra is buy the best you can afford, the keep the glass and upgrade your body!
I'm in the process of trading from a Sigma 24-70 to a Nikon 24-70 for all the reasons above!
Usual mantra is buy the best you can afford, the keep the glass and upgrade your body!
Well I don't do motorsport, but I have this hunch that there's an idea afoot that you need fast lenses for motorsport because the cars are fast.... as someone said to me at a wedding reception, who ran a motorsport business, 'of course you'll need fast lenses...'. (I resisted the temptation to tell him what kind of tyres to use)
My thoughts are that motorport generally takes place in decent light, and add to this that much of what you do will be panning, so you don't need crazy shutter speeds. If you're after shallow DOF an ordinary 300mm telephoto will do that simply by virtue of the magnification. Of course if you're paid to take the photos then you can load up with big lenses, but for the odd trackday for fun I'd be perfectly happy with a decent 70-300mm. Make sure it's USM in Canon-speak for fast AF though. Much of the success will be down to you, not so much the gear.
My thoughts are that motorport generally takes place in decent light, and add to this that much of what you do will be panning, so you don't need crazy shutter speeds. If you're after shallow DOF an ordinary 300mm telephoto will do that simply by virtue of the magnification. Of course if you're paid to take the photos then you can load up with big lenses, but for the odd trackday for fun I'd be perfectly happy with a decent 70-300mm. Make sure it's USM in Canon-speak for fast AF though. Much of the success will be down to you, not so much the gear.
An f2.8 telephoto lens will give you better potential if it's really dull and wet (did I mention weather protection on lenses in that price range) and potentially faster focussing for your high speed action shots taken at a rapid number of frames per second. It should also have pretty good image quality. With closer subjects it will also provide some compositional advantages from a shallower depth of field when wide open. Often fast lenses perform at their best when wide open.
Additional effects will involve a lightening of the bank account and the potential for back pain without undergoing a specialised fitness regime in preparation.
These fast lenses are often relatively large and heavy due to the amount glass required.
With a crop sensor, as on the 500D, a 300mm lens is quite reasonable for 'frame filling', though the ability to go to 400 on occasion might be useful. If you decide to grit you teeth I think most would agree that the Canon 70-200 f4 (?), with or without IS, is an exceptional lens in terms of sharpness and general image quality and with a 1.4x or 2x gives some flexibility and extra reach but should still allow the AF system enough light to work adequately well on the body. It's a more manageable beast than the f2.8 version. The IS would be nice to have but I'm not sure it would make much difference for motor sport action shots, being primarly aimed at low shutter speed hand held 'shake'.
I have a Canon 70-300 f4.5 to f5.6 DO lens which gives good results in terms of frame filling at 300mm from the stands on the inside at Copse, for example, and is OK at some other places a little more distant from the action. I'm not sure how it would get on with the grandstands at Woodcote now they have been moved back. Probably OK, especially since pit action is now a lot further away!
The DO lens is relatively short and unobstrusive for a 300, though quite weighty. Also not 'white'!. However it's rare, expensive new and not often found used. That said I bought mine used and at a very reasonable price since it seems to be not the most popular lens. Not sure why - I rather like it. It works well on my 400D.
I have to say that apguy's examples look good at the price. If the quality control of the lens is consistent (and I'm not in any way suggesting it isn't since I have no idea of reputation) then it's difficult to fault, especially at the money. You could pay as much to hire something for the weekend.
Additional effects will involve a lightening of the bank account and the potential for back pain without undergoing a specialised fitness regime in preparation.
These fast lenses are often relatively large and heavy due to the amount glass required.With a crop sensor, as on the 500D, a 300mm lens is quite reasonable for 'frame filling', though the ability to go to 400 on occasion might be useful. If you decide to grit you teeth I think most would agree that the Canon 70-200 f4 (?), with or without IS, is an exceptional lens in terms of sharpness and general image quality and with a 1.4x or 2x gives some flexibility and extra reach but should still allow the AF system enough light to work adequately well on the body. It's a more manageable beast than the f2.8 version. The IS would be nice to have but I'm not sure it would make much difference for motor sport action shots, being primarly aimed at low shutter speed hand held 'shake'.
I have a Canon 70-300 f4.5 to f5.6 DO lens which gives good results in terms of frame filling at 300mm from the stands on the inside at Copse, for example, and is OK at some other places a little more distant from the action. I'm not sure how it would get on with the grandstands at Woodcote now they have been moved back. Probably OK, especially since pit action is now a lot further away!
The DO lens is relatively short and unobstrusive for a 300, though quite weighty. Also not 'white'!. However it's rare, expensive new and not often found used. That said I bought mine used and at a very reasonable price since it seems to be not the most popular lens. Not sure why - I rather like it. It works well on my 400D.
I have to say that apguy's examples look good at the price. If the quality control of the lens is consistent (and I'm not in any way suggesting it isn't since I have no idea of reputation) then it's difficult to fault, especially at the money. You could pay as much to hire something for the weekend.
Some really good advice there thanks. Think the first thing I can take from it is that an aperture you can drive a bus through isn't necessary.
An ex-workmate has a couple of EF/EF-S lenses so planning on messing around with those for an hour or two to help my research. Beginning to say the zoom is going to be a more important characteristic for the types of shooting I do.
An ex-workmate has a couple of EF/EF-S lenses so planning on messing around with those for an hour or two to help my research. Beginning to say the zoom is going to be a more important characteristic for the types of shooting I do.
Fast focus is important and a focus limiter is nice. The advantages of F2.8 over F4 are not that significant unless the light is bad or you're doing endurance racing events like Le Mans. Most of my motor sport pictures are at shutter speeds of around 250-500 so well within the range of an F5.6 without doing silly ISO settings.
Stick clear of teleconverters unles you have "L" glass as the light and optical penalty is not worth it. The crop can be done on the PC with limit quality loss and get the same effect.
IS will help but only if you can separate the V and H axis. The best advice will be to practice panning and to be able to keep both eyes to open to keep the framing whilst doing busts on the motor drive.
Stick clear of teleconverters unles you have "L" glass as the light and optical penalty is not worth it. The crop can be done on the PC with limit quality loss and get the same effect.
IS will help but only if you can separate the V and H axis. The best advice will be to practice panning and to be able to keep both eyes to open to keep the framing whilst doing busts on the motor drive.
It depends what sort of "Motorsport" you intend to shoot.
Anyone who thinks Motorsport & good light go hand in hand clearly hasn't shot a Forest Rally at 2pm in December/January. Even f2.8 can be too slow for that ! The main advantage of faster lenses is that they allow more light onto the AF sensors, assuming the camera has a good enough AF system to take advantage of it.
For the Circuit season (March to October/November) my main weapons are the Sigma 500 f4.5 and the 120-300 (with 1.4xTC). Once i start venturing into the forests the 120-300 f2.8, 200 f2.8 and 85 f1.8 are all i need. I'm not suggesting you need to spend ££££ before anyone jumps in with both feet.
As for the GP at Silverstone, for Friday & Saturday you'll probably get some good stuff but you're a longggggg way from the track. For Sunday, leave the heavy gear at home and enjoy the day.
Anyone who thinks Motorsport & good light go hand in hand clearly hasn't shot a Forest Rally at 2pm in December/January. Even f2.8 can be too slow for that ! The main advantage of faster lenses is that they allow more light onto the AF sensors, assuming the camera has a good enough AF system to take advantage of it.
For the Circuit season (March to October/November) my main weapons are the Sigma 500 f4.5 and the 120-300 (with 1.4xTC). Once i start venturing into the forests the 120-300 f2.8, 200 f2.8 and 85 f1.8 are all i need. I'm not suggesting you need to spend ££££ before anyone jumps in with both feet.
As for the GP at Silverstone, for Friday & Saturday you'll probably get some good stuff but you're a longggggg way from the track. For Sunday, leave the heavy gear at home and enjoy the day.
Edited by MonkeyHanger on Monday 14th June 18:10
I used the Tamron 70-300mm for GT1s at Silverstone, feckin' cold/dull and struggling with ISO800 on 350D(ISO400 acceptable though) new layout of Silverstone doesn't help in the main with although if you are in stand of new complex should get a good few snaps just bit of a funny angle, elsewhere plenty of catch fencing just at the wrong distance imho and GP will be rammed not going to help.
Have you considered secondhand L glass, buy it if you don't use it you will pretty much get your money back, must admit I don't do enough to justify beyond the Tamron although it doesn't seem to get on as well with my 40D struggling to autofocus so having fun with manual. Would you use the lens for anything else?
Have you considered secondhand L glass, buy it if you don't use it you will pretty much get your money back, must admit I don't do enough to justify beyond the Tamron although it doesn't seem to get on as well with my 40D struggling to autofocus so having fun with manual. Would you use the lens for anything else?
You need a 70-200 f2.8IS and 100-400 (for the further away shots)
Thought about hiring a couple for the weekend? http://www.lensesforhire.com/
Thought about hiring a couple for the weekend? http://www.lensesforhire.com/
Edited by 4hero on Monday 14th June 21:43
I've used various over the years, started with a Siggy 75-300 many many years ago, was way too slow for anything other than the brightest summers day. Saved up and got a s/h Siggy 70-200 F2.8, probably the best 1st motorsport lens ever (was lucky to find one sub £500).
Since then I have used Siggy 120-300 F2.8 (no need to goto the gym anymore after carrying that around) and a Siggy 100-300 F4, the later again being an amazing lens and I think seriously under-rated.
Not earning the pennies on it at the moment so have had to have a clear out, just down to the Canon 35-350mm L, 4.5-5.6, a slow lens, but works well with the 1D. Plus weather sealed for when I play on the boats.
Since then I have used Siggy 120-300 F2.8 (no need to goto the gym anymore after carrying that around) and a Siggy 100-300 F4, the later again being an amazing lens and I think seriously under-rated.
Not earning the pennies on it at the moment so have had to have a clear out, just down to the Canon 35-350mm L, 4.5-5.6, a slow lens, but works well with the 1D. Plus weather sealed for when I play on the boats.
I did well with my Canon 20d and the canon 300mm F4 L IS prime together with the canon x1.4 mkII extender, i found that 300mm plus was required for tracks to be in on t action and the IS is also very handy on darker days, both of these lenses were for sale on here a few weeks back but i took them off due to a lack of interest,
see here http://www.pbase.com/elliot_d/silverstone_testing_...
see here http://www.pbase.com/elliot_d/silverstone_testing_...
Edited by elliotdavies on Saturday 7th August 09:00
4hero said:
Thought about hiring a couple for the weekend? http://www.lensesforhire.com/
Good idea. I can recommend these guys. I just hired a Canon 70-200 2.8L for a week for the Tour de France. Great lens and superb service from the hire company. Edited by 4hero on Monday 14th June 21:43
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff