what is a good lens for this?

[clutch]

hi im new to dslr's, and i just got a xti and i was hoping you could help me with a finding a lens. i have no idea what lens would be good for this sort of thing..... but anyway heres what im looking at trying to photgraph. thanks for your time!








http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q234/tubbed440/mayhem/IMG_8138.jpg

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t156/littlemotor/losislidewayz.jpg

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t156/littlemotor/Losiwheelie.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a126/345ikadizzle/ohhh.jpg




these are photos i found on the web that other people have taken. there are not mine.

[forno]

hOW MANY $$$'S DO YOU HAVE TO SPEND

[clutch]

how many $$$'s do you have to spend? well i am about to get a new job soon( wayyyy better pay), so really the best lens available..... so maybe 1000-1500?

[cwphoto]

70-200/2.8 assuming you can get close enough?

[clutch]

70-200/2.8 assuming you can get close enough?
usualy you can get withing around 6ft-10ft of them during a race....

[cwphoto]

usualy you can get withing around 6ft-10ft of them during a race....

That's your lens then. May have to move back slightly though.

[clutch]

That's your lens then. May have to move back slightly though.
Thanks for your help! :D

[sunnythepsychocat]

70-200/2.8 assuming you can get close enough?
Why not tell him to save up a little to get the best, 70-200/f2.8 IS?
After all, it only $200 more, and he will be VERY happy that he did;)

[clutch]

Why not tell him to save up a little to get the best, 70-200/f2.8 IS?
After all, it only $200 more, and he will be VERY happy that he did;)i suspect thats the lens he ment for me anyway.... plus thats the only lens that turned up in my google search....

[cwphoto]

Why not tell him to save up a little to get the best, 70-200/f2.8 IS?
After all, it only $200 more, and he will be VERY happy that he did;)

If you insist. ;)

[coldrain]

Why not tell him to save up a little to get the best, 70-200/f2.8 IS?
After all, it only $200 more, and he will be VERY happy that he did;)
I do not know how it is where live, but the difference is a whole lot more than $200.

The EF 70-200 f2.8 L USM costs at b&h $1140
The EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM costs at b&h $1699

That is a difference of $560!

The non-IS version seems to be a bit better optically. The IS version offers weather sealing and 2-stop IS extra, which both are not needed for said application.

And then there also may be the EF 70-200 f4 L IS USM to consider. Optically it beats its f2.8 siblings. It is half the weight, one f-stop slower. Outdoors in good light the extra f-stop will not be needed. It offers 4-stop IS and weather sealing.
If you do not need f2.8, it is the better lens on all accounts. And it costs $1059 at B&H.

[cwphoto]

I do not know how it is where live, but the difference is a whole lot more than $200.

The EF 70-200 f2.8 L USM costs at b&h $1140
The EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM costs at b&h $1699

That is a difference of $560!

The non-IS version seems to be a bit better optically. The IS version offers weather sealing and 2-stop IS extra, which both are not needed for said application.

And then there also may be the EF 70-200 f4 L IS USM to consider. Optically it beats its f2.8 siblings. It is half the weight, one f-stop slower. Outdoors in good light the extra f-stop will not be needed. It offers 4-stop IS and weather sealing.
If you do not need f2.8, it is the better lens on all accounts. And it costs $1059 at B&H.

The f/2.8 will AF better.

[24Peter]

I think he needs a weather sealed body (looks at all that dust) and hi-performance AF as well (those little suckers can fly). Hence a 1DMkIII :rolleyes:

How's that for toting the Canon line ;)

[Vich]

I was wondering about a fast focusing prime. Will the 85 f1.8 on a crop be long enough? The f1.8 should make for even faster and more accurate AF and it's known as a good action lens. In the $300 range, it's not bad.

Note: The 135L is a dog at low light focusing, and probably most macro lenses (like the 100) due to all the glass I presume (just been my experience - macro = slow focus).

[mcenut]

The f/2.8 will AF better.

Only in low light with the f/2.8 focus better than a f/4.0 lens. And looking at those photos they are not shot in low light or with a huge aperture. I'd say the largest aperture used in the above photos is f/4.0.

[cwphoto]

Only in low light with the f/2.8 focus better than a f/4.0 lens. And looking at those photos they are not shot in low light or with a huge aperture. I'd say the largest aperture used in the above photos is f/4.0.

All things being equal, an f/2.8 lens will focus faster and more accurately than an f/4 lens regardless of the ambient EV - even more so if the camera's active focusing point is cross-type @ f/2.8.

The actual aperture used for exposure is irrelevant.

[Vich]

All things being equal, an f/2.8 lens will focus faster and more accurately than an f/4 lens regardless of the ambient EV - even more so if the camera's active focusing point is cross-type @ f/2.8.

The actual aperture used for exposure is irrelevant.

Glad this came up. I have a choice of 5D + 70-200 f2.8 IS or 5D + 70-200 f4.0 at next week's wedding (I'm 2nd shooter - main shooter loaning me 5D for better noise). Daytime wedding, but many shaded areas (3PM ceremony at winery)

I was about to go with the f4.0 because it's so light. Thanks CW. I totally forgot about the focusing advantage.

[cwphoto]

Glad this came up. I have a choice of 5D + 70-200 f2.8 IS or 5D + 70-200 f4.0 at next week's wedding (I'm 2nd shooter - main shooter loaning me 5D for better noise). Daytime wedding, but many shaded areas (3PM ceremony at winery)

I was about to go with the f4.0 because it's so light. Thanks CW. I totally forgot about the focusing advantage.

What a nice problem to have!

[Vich]

What a nice problem to have!

And, more than likely, expensive! It'll be tough to go back. (on the f2.8 IS and 5D fronts). :rolleyes: