new camera/lens suggestion

[ctjcad]

..okay all you photography-experts @ BC, i need some inputs from you guys & gals on a couple queries:
1. If you guys have used these lenses, can you share a bit about them?? I'm looking at Tamron & Sigma lenses...Or they're not worth investing??..
2. Which one "fits" better with Nikon or Canon bodies??..
thanks for any inputs..

 

[2wheels04]

Tamron/ Sigma for Nikon/Canon

..okay ... some inputs from you guys & gals on a couple queries:
1. If you guys have used these ...

Input from gals notwithstanding, methinks you are hinting at shooting tourney such as SS and everything above 1* events.

Sigma 28-300mm 3.5/6.3 Macro auto is my favourite. It does report f5.6 at 300mm so output is 'darker.' Many times, the pictures are blurred at 300mm. However both these situations are correctable post-processing. From experience, I would say the focus is dodgy beyond 200mm. Similar situation at wide (28mm). The 18-200mm might be better use.

Colour-wise, there is green and red aberration. The Yonex-court reproduces fine. But get the players, eg. the Sino-red, and the edges loose the sharpness. And the brighter the object, the purpler the fringe. No good.

I have not used the Canon body, but me buddies have. They assure me, to get this combination right is dicey at best. A couple of lenses focussed satisfactorily on one body but another lens did not give good front and back-focus.

No matter what your inclination, in practice, the more the elements in the lens body, the better. Unless this is of general interest, I would be hesitant to bring out low-dispersing aspherical elements and all such fun optics stuff, PM me. I do not have comparative pictures using Tamron and Sigma, however, from colleagues who have used each kind, Sigma is sharper than Tamron, especially beyond 200mm.

 

[kwun]

what will you be using it for?

 

[ctjcad]

Muchas gracias por las informaciones..

Input from gals notwithstanding, methinks you are hinting at shooting tourney such as SS and everything above 1* events.

Sigma 28-300mm 3.5/6.3 Macro auto is my favourite. It does report f5.6 at 300mm so output is 'darker.' Many times, the pictures are blurred at 300mm. However both these situations are correctable post-processing. From experience, I would say the focus is dodgy beyond 200mm. Similar situation at wide (28mm). The 18-200mm might be better use.

Colour-wise, there is green and red aberration. The Yonex-court reproduces fine. But get the players, eg. the Sino-red, and the edges loose the sharpness. And the brighter the object, the purpler the fringe. No good.

I have not used the Canon body, but me buddies have. They assure me, to get this combination right is dicey at best. A couple of lenses focussed satisfactorily on one body but another lens did not give good front and back-focus.

No matter what your inclination, in practice, the more the elements in the lens body, the better. Unless this is of general interest, I would be hesitant to bring out low-dispersing aspherical elements and all such fun optics stuff, PM me. I do not have comparative pictures using Tamron and Sigma, however, from colleagues who have used each kind, Sigma is sharper than Tamron, especially beyond 200mm.

..2wheels04, appreciate your input..Yes, i'm looking for all-around type of lenses..But not strictly only for taking badminton actions. I might use it for other sporting events (e.g. basketball, baseball or other activities). Preferably, i'd like to have it stuck to my camera body, in other words, it'll be the "workhorse" lens; with 1 or 2 more, max., additional lenses.
I'm also thinking abt cost-wise, whether it's worth to get one of these 2 brands or it's better to go for Nikon or Canon specific lenses (yes, looking into those 2 brands for the camera body)...
Btw, what do you mean by "the more elements in the lens' body, the better"?..

what will you be using it for?

..hehe, well, if badminton is of any interest, then so be it.....Actually, i'd like to use the lens(es) for general purpose. I know taking baddy pics requires a much faster lens, since the lighting conditions vary & the actions are much faster than most other sports (maybe ping-pong is faster?!)...

How about inputs from other photo-experts??..Cheung, red00ecstrat, AChan??..

 

[red00ecstrat]

chris, i m sorry. i won't be able to give you any advice on sigma or tamron lenses. coz i'd never owned one.
using of fast lens is a must in sports photography. and depending on your shooting position. sometimes you need to use a telephoto lens. sometimes you need a wide-angle lens. but at the same time. both lenses might be equally useful in the same shooting spot. it's all up to a photographer's eyes and imagination.
indeed, you just can't go wrong with a 70-200mm F/2.8 if u are interested in sports photography. and of course it's a good lens for taking portrait shots and something else!
please don't ever call me an expert again chris! i am not indeed.

 

[kwun]

i have had some sigma and tamron lenses. optically Tamron has better optics in general. i have a 17-35/2.8-4 which is really sharp. however, the focusing is very very slow. good for landscape but will never work for badminton.

sigma on the other hand, i don't have very good things to say. the optics is average, the focus on the HSM lenses is sharp but inaccurate, the focus on non-HSM lenses are as slow as Tamron.

 

[ctjcad]

Getting a bit clearer...but still searching and narrowing for other options..

...
Sigma 28-300mm 3.5/6.3 Macro auto is my favourite. It does report f5.6 at 300mm so output is 'darker.' Many times, the pictures are blurred at 300mm. However both these situations are correctable post-processing. From experience, I would say the focus is dodgy beyond 200mm. Similar situation at wide (28mm). The 18-200mm might be better use..
...

..that's true...I don't think i'll shoot anything much over 200mm..

chris, i m sorry. i won't be able to give you any advice on sigma or tamron lenses. coz i'd never owned one.
using of fast lens is a must in sports photography. and depending on your shooting position. sometimes you need to use a telephoto lens. sometimes you need a wide-angle lens. but at the same time. both lenses might be equally useful in the same shooting spot. it's all up to a photographer's eyes and imagination.
indeed, you just can't go wrong with a 70-200mm F/2.8 if u are interested in sports photography. and of course it's a good lens for taking portrait shots and something else!
please don't ever call me an expert again chris! i am not indeed.

..appreciate your input, again, red00ecstrat!..Yeah, i might need to have multiple options of lenses to achieve whatever i need to shoot..The 70-200mm seems to be the most "recommended" lens for a standard zoom lens.
Btw, my beginner level of "photography" is not even close to your level of "photography expertise"..

i have had some sigma and tamron lenses. optically Tamron has better optics in general. i have a 17-35/2.8-4 which is really sharp. however, the focusing is very very slow. good for landscape but will never work for badminton.

sigma on the other hand, i don't have very good things to say. the optics is average, the focus on the HSM lenses is sharp but inaccurate, the focus on non-HSM lenses are as slow as Tamron.

..thanks for the input, kwun..Hmm, that clears some more queries in my mind...Hmm, are you scooting me over to the Canon or Nikon side??..

Hmm, but now, i noticed Pentax has a 18-250mm f/2.2-4.5 lens, which i haven't seen in the other 4 brands...is this something usable/worth trying??..any inputs on Pentax lens(es)..

 

[kwun]

chris,

the lens is a f/3.5-6.3

even f/3.5 is not fast enough, not to say f/6.3

you will be shooting at 1/25 seconds which is hardly barely enough to take a photo of a service.

 

[ctjcad]

Oooops, that's right..

chris,

the lens is a f/3.5-6.3

even f/3.5 is not fast enough, not to say f/6.3

you will be shooting at 1/25 seconds which is hardly barely enough to take a photo of a service.

..yeah, i noticed that after i checked it again in a different website...forgot to edit it...oh well then, i guess there goes the lens..
So i guess, looking at the list of lens selections (from those brands), most of the standard zoom or those telephoto zoom lenses can't go lower (in number) than f2.8..hmmm..

 

[Cheung]

..2wheels04, appreciate your input..Yes, i'm looking for all-around type of lenses..But not strictly only for taking badminton actions. I might use it for other sporting events (e.g. basketball, baseball or other activities). Preferably, i'd like to have it stuck to my camera body, in other words, it'll be the "workhorse" lens; with 1 or 2 more, max., additional lenses.
I'm also thinking abt cost-wise, whether it's worth to get one of these 2 brands or it's better to go for Nikon or Canon specific lenses (yes, looking into those 2 brands for the camera body)...
Btw, what do you mean by "the more elements in the lens' body, the better"?..

..hehe, well, if badminton is of any interest, then so be it.....Actually, i'd like to use the lens(es) for general purpose. I know taking baddy pics requires a much faster lens, since the lighting conditions vary & the actions are much faster than most other sports (maybe ping-pong is faster?!)...

How about inputs from other photo-experts??..Cheung, red00ecstrat, AChan??..

Basketball and badminton. Basically, if you think you are going to photograph these, you'll need at least a f2.8 lens being indoor sports.

I have a f2.8 zoom stuck on to my camera most of the time. When indoors, I'll move to one of the primes if trying to avoid flash.

 

[ctjcad]

Thanks for the input..

Basketball and badminton. Basically, if you think you are going to photograph these, you'll need at least a f2.8 lens being indoor sports.

I have a f2.8 zoom stuck on to my camera most of the time. When indoors, I'll move to one of the primes if trying to avoid flash.

..gotcha~appreciate your input, Cheung..So, on the highlighted part in bold, are you suggesting it's much better to use a prime or fixed focal length lens, rather than a zoom type lens, w/out using flash??..

 

[Cheung]

..gotcha~appreciate your input, Cheung..So, on the highlighted part in bold, are you suggesting it's much better to use a prime or fixed focal length lens, rather than a zoom type lens, w/out using flash??..

My aim is to gain a high enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake or subject movement, without flash. Hence, the use of primes.

 

[ctjcad]

I see..

My aim is to gain a high enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake or subject movement, without flash. Hence, the use of primes.

..so, on that note, which prime lens(es) would you recommend, say, if we're not sitting right next to the court/playing area??..Or should i look for the longest focal length capable lens(es), not zoom, w/the fastest aperture??..

 

[taneepak]

Lens selection for indoor sports must consider lens speed (low apertures preferred), weight and size of lens, appropriate focal length, and for some people image quality. Prime lenses are faster than their zoom counterpart, always sharper, and usually lighter, but it is not as versatile. AOTBE the more lens elements in a lens design the poorer the lens because of loss of contrast.
Another important factor in this is that the size and weight of both the camera and their lenses are affected by their crop factor. If you want fast lens full sensor size cameras are going to be very heavy. Half crop size cameras will allow you to have very fast prime lenses and zoom lenses that are more manageable to carry around.

 

[Cheung]

..so, on that note, which prime lens(es) would you recommend, say, if we're not sitting right next to the court/playing area??..Or should i look for the longest focal length capable lens(es), not zoom, w/the fastest aperture??..

Which camera are you going to use? As Taneepak says, we need to know wether you'll be using full frame or crop sensor camera. Initial choices made will depend on choice of camera.

Here are a few guidelines.

1) maximum aperture F4 zooms are useless indoors. However, they are good when travelling because lightweight. If you buy one, don't expect it to be useful indoors.

2) I have a f2.8 telephoto zoom. Because of its weight, I very rarely bring it out on casual trips. It's mainly for indoor sports and performances

3) I have primes as well. They are really good - give better quality, allow you to use lower ISO. I have the Canon 100mm/f2.0. Been eyeing the 135mm/f2.0. Both are very good lenses. A good setup would be to have the 85/1.8 and the 135/2.0.

4) Canon prime lenses have USM allowing faster focus speed. Not really so important in causal shots but important for action i.e. badminton. Now, I think Nikon does not have equivalent motors in their prime lenses - only their zooms. Kwun knows better.

5) Finally, what is your budget? It wasn't high for me at first, but has grown! hahaha


edited

Basic Canon setup for badminton (considering budget limitations)

Canon 20D, 30, or 40D minimum
70-200/f2.8 (Sigma HSM version should be OK)

If it doesn't work in your gym (poor lighting), consider adding the following:
85/1.8
135/2.0
Work out which one (or both!) to buy first based on where you usually sit and the focal length you think you will use the most.

In time, you'll probably end up with both primes

 

[ctjcad]

Thanks again..

Which camera are you going to use? As Taneepak says, we need to know wether you'll be using full frame or crop sensor camera. Initial choices made will depend on choice of camera.

Here are a few guidelines.

1) maximum aperture F4 zooms are useless indoors. However, they are good when travelling because lightweight. If you buy one, don't expect it to be useful indoors.

2) I have a f2.8 telephoto zoom. Because of its weight, I very rarely bring it out on casual trips. It's mainly for indoor sports and performances

3) I have primes as well. They are really good - give better quality, allow you to use lower ISO. I have the Canon 100mm/f2.0. Been eyeing the 135mm/f2.0. Both are very good lenses. A good setup would be to have the 85/1.8 and the 135/2.0.

4) Canon prime lenses have USM allowing faster focus speed. Not really so important in causal shots but important for action i.e. badminton. Now, I think Nikon does not have equivalent motors in their prime lenses - only their zooms. Kwun knows better.

5) Finally, what is your budget? It wasn't high for me at first, but has grown! hahaha


edited

Basic Canon setup for badminton (considering budget limitations)

Canon 20D, 30, or 40D minimum
70-200/f2.8 (Sigma HSM version should be OK)

If it doesn't work in your gym (poor lighting), consider adding the following:
85/1.8
135/2.0
Work out which one (or both!) to buy first based on where you usually sit and the focal length you think you will use the most.

In time, you'll probably end up with both primes

..Cheung, thanks for giving some more guidelines; they're helpful...
Yeah, i guess there are advantages and disadvantages to owning those type of lens(es) (primes and zooms)..
To answer what kind of dslr i'm planning to get, well, i'm still researching. That's why i asked first about Sigma or Tamron lenses, if anyone has used them & which one would "fit better" with either a Canon or Nikon.

As for budget/cost, well, i'm planning to start off low first as i don't know if i'll expand even more. Thus, inquiry abt Tamron & Sigma lenses which are in general a bit cheaper than Nikon or Canon lenses.
Perhaps i should rent/borrow the lenses you've mentioned and try them out first before making a decision on which lens(es) i should invest in.

As to what brand or model i'm thinking of getting, well, i'm looking into either a Nikon or Canon. Actually, I saw 2 ads the other day (on craiglist.org) for 2 used Nikon D40 with 2 lenses on sale for $350 & $400. Yup, for real, that cheap (but i think they're gone now)...I was thinking of purchasing it and then possibly selling both lenses and upgrading to a lens i would be using.

taneepak, thanks for your reply.

 

[Cheung]

My strong advice is avoid all those entry level DSLRs. The reaction time from pressing the sutter button to taking the picture is just too slow for badminton. Then you might actually have to buy another and better camera to make up for the frustration. Take it as learning from another person's experience.

So all Nikon D40's, D70, D80, harder to get the correct timing for indoor sports. Similar situation with Canon's 350D, 400D, XTi - my advice is not to waste your money - just avoid them and get a better body. I wasted nearly 900 US dollars

 

[ctjcad]

^^I hear ya..^^

..you mean, "avoid them like the plague"??..hmm, i had a small feeling you would suggest that..
Back to the type of lenses, i guess the general principle is:
Only primes and short zoom lenses are worth investing, esp. for action/sports type of photography...

 

[ctjcad]

Adding teleconverters..

This just crossed my mind. If any of you guys have used a TC to shoot baddy actions, what do you guys think about adding teleconverter lens to a prime lens?..
Say, i want to add a 2x TC to a 50mm/1.4 lens..I know the stop will change to 2 stops:
1. Will the image quality change also?
2. Is it a worthwhile idea to do that rather than to invest in a longer FFL or short zoom w/ faster aperture lens (e.g. 135mm/1.4 or the 17-55mm/2.8)?

thanks for any replies..

 

[kwun]

wait Chris... last time i talked to you, you were talking about getting a D3, what happened to that plan?

TC multiplies the focal length, but also at the same time multiplies the aperture. so with a 2x TC one a 50/1.4, you will end up with a 100/2.8. which is nothing too spectacular and at the same time, the TC will degrade image quality as well as AF speed.

the only TC that is worth using is the 1.4x as that is less image degradation.

if you want to start with something, i suggest getting a 50/1.4 and/or 85/1.8 and then use those for badminton. you will not be disappointed by those.