Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA.
    Posts
    1,161

    What to do? advice needed

    So as the Tamron 70-200 2.8 release date continues to wander in limbo high school soccer and football both have started this week. Man it seems early for school to start again. I have the 70-300 Tamron, gret lens, a bit light challenged, add to fast sports it's still good but not great. I am tempted to buy another "fast" quality telephoto but what to get? or should I pick up a flash unit and use it as I need it with the 70-300? "sorry Don I havent picked up a flash unit yet" As I have said I can shoot right from the sidelines. the tamron 70-200 sounds perfect but I can;t get it NOW!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Have you tried bumping the ISO or is the quality deteriorate too quickly? That would be the only feasible solution for the time being. I doubt a flash is going to help in a spectator sport .
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA.
    Posts
    1,161
    Bumping the ISO does help a bit, if it were staionary objects I could go darker, but with fast action low light and high ISO it degrades pretty quick. J.V. game starts at 5 P.M. varsity starts at 7 P.M. right now I can shoot into the second half of varsity game, but by the end of September into October 7 P.M. is pretty dark here, may well be to dark for most lenses though.
    Sony A700_____________Minolta AF 50mm. F/1.7
    Minolta AF 70-210mm F/3.5-4.5 Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII LD Asp. [IF]
    Tamron SP AF 70-200mm. F/2.8 DI LD [IF] Macro
    Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2
    Tokina AF 28-70mm F/3.5-4.5
    Tokina AF AT-X 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6
    http://flickr.com/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,562
    If you get a flash you might need to get the Better Beamer Flash Extender. I don't know much about it you can do a search and look into it.
    Frank
    Sony A77
    Sony A580
    Sony A 100
    Maxxum 400si.
    Sony 18-70 Kit Lens
    Minolta AF 35-70
    Minolta AF 50 f/1.7
    Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di LD
    Tamron 60mm Macro
    Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
    Tamron 2x Converter
    Sony HVL-F42AM
    Quantaray 70-300 4.5-5.6 Macro
    Slingshot 200 Bag



    http://www.flickr.com/photos/22083244@N06/

    http://s305.photobucket.com/albums/nn219/sparkie1263/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    You are starting to get into the realm of very expensive glass. Again, the 70-200mm f/2.8 will be the best option for this problem available at a reasonable cost. The SONY version, the SAL-70200 70-200mm f/2.8 G SSM is a worthwhile consideration ... and immediately available ... for $1700.

    The CZ 135mm f/1.8 would be brighter, but rather chancey with being a little soft when it is wide open. The "fixed" nature of this PRIME also does not lend itself very well to sports, unless you like to crop or do the "manual zoom" part with your own two feet. That's more running around than they probably do on the darn field!

    Minolta used to make a 200mm f/2.8 APO ... which is one hell of a piece of glass. If you could get your hands on that one ... LOL ... then you'd be a real player. Still would have to dance a bit, to frame, but it would be there and sharp looking as hell.

    The flash aspect seems a little ... well, out of sight, so to speak. You would need an flash array with strobes to get enough light to be effective. That's also an expensive idea for non-professional ... well, anything! LOL

    Can you imagine, you are a player, running along the sideline and WHAMO! Instant sunlight! I think it may ruin the intent of the game, eh?

    The 70-300mm f/4-5.6 was designed for daytime use. I have rarely seen it used indoors, successfully. In fact, after you use one, you usually sigh and begin eyeing your checkbook balance ... for the 70-200 f/2.8 Believe me when I say that I have been impatiently waiting for mine. Just ask the folks at TAMRON ... they probably have five of my emails asking, "Where the heck is it?"
    Last edited by DonSchap; 08-20-2008 at 10:55 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    85
    I shoot baseball, football, soccer for news purposes, and the 70-300 is THE price effective option, with the only problem that you can get too close if you let the play come to you. But as you surmise, flash is mandatory for much of football season, but it has to have reach.

    The Sony HVL-F58AM, which has a reach of 58 meters, which is good for over 180 feet, would be the tool of choice, but that is a $500 item.

    I have a Sigma EF 530 DG ST, which is now up to about $180. It has been going up like a lot of this stuff this year (I gave $135 including freight). It has a reach of 53 meters, good for about 175 feet.

    The extra feature EF 530 DG SUPER TTL is about $230, and may add features useful for other purposes. You should review your primary purposes to choose.

    I haven't found the less-featured model to hamper my uses, which are the sports shots you describe, but if you are also contemplating trying to match Don's arsenal, and get into other creative work in the dark, then it might be a different story.

    My only complaint is it gives NO warning when the batteries are going dead. You just suddenly don't get a flash. The Sony solves that, but you must weigh the extra cost.

    Use GOOD rechargables ONLY.

    For football, you can't reach the opposite sideline at much of an angle, but you should reach the far hash mark for 2/3 of the field. For baseball, you run out of range with the 70-300 as well as reach for your flash at about the same point in the outfield unless you are well up the foul line.

    The strength of the field lights makes a difference. In my area, most of the stadiums are horribly poorly lit, even most of the college stadiums. ALL the journalists around here use their flashes for HS because the stadiums are dark to very dark, in photography terms. The ADs will all brag about their "great" lights, but in reality, the best fields have about half of what they need. The video guys doing game tapes will say the same thing.

    Don't bother with a light meter at most high school stadiums, it will just ask that you let it know once they have turned the lights on.

    The trick with the slow lens is to pick shots where the subject is NOT at full speed, or you still can't keep up. Focus on QBs as they set up, RBs coming at your side, as or before they cut upfield. WR catches are the toughest, you have to anticipate the shot, and miss a lot of them. And it is heck getting the teams to rerun the big play. (LOL)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA.
    Posts
    1,161

    Thanks Panda

    Good info. thank you, confirms what I have been thinking. As I can't lay my hands on any low yield atomic weapons to use Don's patented atomic flash I will have to do something else. The word of the day is that the new tamron will be in the stores at the end of Sept. That is the route i am going to go, I think it will be a good lens for me. I am also going to pick up a flash here before long as I do not have one, Maybe the early Sony one what is it the HVL-36, are about $200.00 or so, I think it will fill my needs.
    again thanks for the tips.
    Sony A700_____________Minolta AF 50mm. F/1.7
    Minolta AF 70-210mm F/3.5-4.5 Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII LD Asp. [IF]
    Tamron SP AF 70-200mm. F/2.8 DI LD [IF] Macro
    Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2
    Tokina AF 28-70mm F/3.5-4.5
    Tokina AF AT-X 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6
    http://flickr.com/

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Be warned, you lose twenty feet with that flash. The 56 or 58 give a really nice pop. The new Metz 58 CF1 (for SONY-mount) is also quite a flash.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 08-21-2008 at 10:09 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    85
    I fear for football and soccer you could find those 20 feet vital. Especially if you try some endzone work, or have to work from the stands at some venue. That's why I suggested the budget-wise Sigmas. And unfortunately, unless you find a Minolta or Sony user, you can't test one against another, due to the proprietary mount. And you also can't sell the unit as easily later.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA.
    Posts
    1,161
    thanks guys, checked out the specs. made reminder notes, the sigma and the metz go on the short list, but will watch the sony 56 for sales also.
    Sony A700_____________Minolta AF 50mm. F/1.7
    Minolta AF 70-210mm F/3.5-4.5 Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII LD Asp. [IF]
    Tamron SP AF 70-200mm. F/2.8 DI LD [IF] Macro
    Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2
    Tokina AF 28-70mm F/3.5-4.5
    Tokina AF AT-X 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6
    http://flickr.com/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •