Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 For Sports Photography? My daughter started fencing in high school and I'm looking for a decent lens to shoot her matches. One of the problems I have encountered so far is the low light levels in the gymnasiums where these matches are typically held. The other challenge I'm faced with is the action in fencing is extremely fast--often I can't even tell who scored the point (that's why they use electric scoring).Would the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens be a good choice for those conditions? Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 For Sports Photography? My daughter started fencing in high school and I'm looking for a decent lens to shoot her matches. One of the problems I have encountered so far... » Read More Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 For Sports Photography? My daughter started fencing in high school and I'm looking for a decent lens to shoot her matches. One of the problems I have encountered so far is the low light levels in the gymnasiums where these matches are typically held. The other challenge I'm faced with is the action in fencing is extremely fast--often I can't even tell who scored the point (that's why they use electric scoring).Would the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens be a good choice for those conditions? « Show Less
812301
Its an excellent lens which works very well in low light. I have not used it for indoor sports shooting though. The IS is great for things that don't move much but won't help freeze the action at all. An f2.8 zoom would be much better than a kit lens.You might also want to consider a fast prime lens like the 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4 or perhaps a 30mm fast prime. These will buy you an extra two stops at a much lower price.
812302
Actually, I'm merely guessing on the focal length from your inquiry about the 17-55mm. Your choice will depend on how much reach you actually need.Some suggestions:At $80, the Canon 50mm f1.8 is very inexpensive with pretty good optics and a wide aperture. Focusing may be too slow for your needs but its so cheap it might be worth a try.The Canon 50mm f1.4 adds fast USM focusing and somewhat better optics.The Canon 85mm f1.8 is a good choice if you need more reach.The Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM get pretty good ratings and is a good choice if you're fairly close or need a wider view. Actually, I'm merely guessing on the focal length from your inquiry about the 17-55mm. Your choice will depend on how much reach you actually need.Some suggestions:At $80, the Canon 50mm f1.8 is very inexpensive with pretty good optics and a wide aperture. Focusing may be too slow for your needs but its so cheap it might be worth a try.The Canon 50mm f1.4 adds fast USM focusing and somewhat better optics.The Canon 85mm f1.8 is a good choice if you need more reach.The Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM get pretty good ratings and is a good... » Read More Actually, I'm merely guessing on the focal length from your inquiry about the 17-55mm. Your choice will depend on how much reach you actually need.Some suggestions:At $80, the Canon 50mm f1.8 is very inexpensive with pretty good optics and a wide aperture. Focusing may be too slow for your needs but its so cheap it might be worth a try.The Canon 50mm f1.4 adds fast USM focusing and somewhat better optics.The Canon 85mm f1.8 is a good choice if you need more reach.The Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM get pretty good ratings and is a good choice if you're fairly close or need a wider view. « Show Less
812303
Thanks very much for your advice.Any recommendations for a fast 50 or 30 mm prime lens?
812304
Thanks for the additional info. I am primarily involved in shooting fencing matches, and can usually get fairly close to the action, so I'll probably be taking a good look at the Sigma lens.
2253131
Not nearly as good as the F2.8. I use this lens on the Nikon D5200. I initially brought the lens for my daughter's lacrosse games. It was excellent during the day games, but not so hot taking action shots during the night games. However, when taking no action shots (i.e. crowd, sideline, etc.) it performed well under the stadium lights. If I felt comfortable enough dishing out the extra $grand and lugging around a much heavier lens I would have gone with the 2.8, but I'm extremely happy with the F4.
2240581
Thank you Very much for your Help, what do you think about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? If you had the money for only one general purpose lens, wich one will you chose?
1787339
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full believer in is, and the 24-105 is the best walk around particularly for full frame that i have met. Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full... » Read More Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full believer in is, and the 24-105 is the best walk around particularly for full frame that i have met. « Show Less
1650133
While this lens performs well in a fairly wide variety of situations, I would recommend the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 af-s dx or the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 af lenses for portraits. Either of those will give you much better performance in lower light situations and they are both very sharp lenses. As I said, the 18-55mm is a great lens but if you want to focus exclusively on portraits, go with one of the others instead. I actually prefer the 35mm over the 50mm. Just my two cents though.
1048465
I have used it for indoor volleyball and it's just OK. The long focus throw makes it a tad slow on cont focus. On single point focus, it was better and sharp at 2.8. Speaking of 2.8, that is bare minimum to work. The Sigma 1.4 85 mm is better choice. Shooting at 2.2 seems to work best in most gyms. DOF is short, so you have to nail the focus. I have also used the FA 77 1.8 for indoor volleyball. That also works really well.
98308
This lens is not great for sports, although it would be OK if you push your iso up. It just doesn't focus terribly fast and is a "slow" lens. That is to say that at the long end, the aperture only opens to f5.6 and your shutter speed will tend to be slower as a result. Out doors, in good light it would be OK. I am not sure about the second part of your question. You can use it at any distance, but obviously the farther you stand from your subject, the smaller they will be.
1784426
The lens is great for all around use. Tack sharp and worth every penny. If you plan on moving full frame it's worth it. On a DX body it will act like a 36-105. It's a bit on the weighty side but not over bearing. I have found the images have a certain pop to them that most other lenses can't provide unless they have the nano coating. Your other option is the great 17-55 which is designed for DX cameras. Look online there are some great reviews. If money isn't an issue go for it.
736773
I did use this lens for my grandson's graduation - when he was on stage, under lighting, got some good shots. But I use the 85mm f/1.8 for most school events. I would think you would want at least 2.8 for most events.
1187804
First off, I'm not an expert or professional photographer and I normally take panoramic views. With that said, I've taken a few shots around the airport of planes coming in to land, and it really does the job. I guess that for sport events like basketball, and with the standard lens, your going to be just fine. If you're into fast pace sports like biking or skate boarding, I would actually recommend something with a viewfinder. I hope this helps.P.S.If you decide to buy this model, get the 200 mm telephoto lens and the DSTE Kit 2pcs BP-1030 Rechargeable Li-ion Battery + Charger. They are worth it! First off, I'm not an expert or professional photographer and I normally take panoramic views. With that said, I've taken a few shots around the airport of planes coming in to land, and it really does the job. I guess that for sport events like basketball, and with the standard lens, your going to be just fine. If you're into fast pace sports like biking or skate boarding, I would actually recommend something with a viewfinder. I hope this helps.P.S.If you decide to buy this model, get the 200 mm telephoto lens and the DSTE Kit 2pcs BP-1030 Rechargeable Li-ion Battery +... » Read More First off, I'm not an expert or professional photographer and I normally take panoramic views. With that said, I've taken a few shots around the airport of planes coming in to land, and it really does the job. I guess that for sport events like basketball, and with the standard lens, your going to be just fine. If you're into fast pace sports like biking or skate boarding, I would actually recommend something with a viewfinder. I hope this helps.P.S.If you decide to buy this model, get the 200 mm telephoto lens and the DSTE Kit 2pcs BP-1030 Rechargeable Li-ion Battery + Charger. They are worth it! « Show Less
98305
I do not know about sports, but have taken wildlife moving and it has done well. Best reviews and info can be found here: http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/lenses/pentax_smc_da_55-300_4-5p8/user-reviews
838887
In my experience with the 85Mm f1.8 is that these lenses are not fast compared to others. This is a portrait lens, not a sports lens...
503709
I have only shot it with the 14-35 f/2 and it was VERTY fast to AF even in indoor conditions. It is much much faster than the E-M5 from what I hear. Maybe not as fast as the E-5 but the 14-35 was plenty fast for me. I can not comment on other lenses as I have not tried them, and probably will not be as A: I am not a fan of large lenses and B: I can not afford to buy them all to test them :)
523655
I would say EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS. You get greater bokeh at f/2.8. Although the weather sealing and better construction of the 24-105 is pretty sweet too.Edit: I forgot to mention that f/2.8 is better than f/4 in low light. But I think you know that already =)
1850457
I have also the XF18-55. The XF27 is a little slower than the 18-55 and a little less accurate when tries to find focus (under difficult and not contrasty conditions). But in general i'm happy with this lens, is not for sports but for street photography for example is fine. Also is very sharp and small and with my X-E2 i can take it everywhere.
518359
Question doesn't say anything about usage of lens. 135 has the fastest focusing probably from all Canon EF lenses, it's sharp and produce shallow DOF. But it's fixed. The other two 24-70 and 24-104 are zooms = more versatile lenses. 24-70 is f2.8 what's advantage for focusing in a dark and produce shallower DOF than 24-105. 24-105 has extended range and IS. So if you need universal lens and you shoot a lot in dark conditions - 24-70 f2.8 If you travel a lot or you need longer end than 70mm and focusing speed isn't critical to you - 24-105 f4 If you need longer lens with fast focusing for concerts, headshoots, or you live in darker world - 135 f2 If your concern is technical quality you can't miss with any of them. Marian
1157673
For sports, the Canon 7D will be a better choice than the Rebel. It has faster autofocus and a faster frame rate. It's low light (i.e., high ISO) qualities are not ideal - I find images shot above ISO 800 to have too much noise to be marketable. For indoor work, you will need a lens with a maximum aperture of F:2.8. These lenses can be really expensive - even without the the IS feature. I own the 70-200 f:2.8 non-IS and it's amazingly sharp and rugged so I recommend it if you are serious about making money with your camera. This lens will work for your portraits and, if you add a 1.4X tele-extender, you will be able to get pretty close when you shoot outdoor soccer. The two lenses you have cover a very good range and should produce a decent image quality. However, I am not sure what kind of money you might get on a trade. Same with the camera body. If you can, I recommend always having a spare body in the camera bag - just in case something happens to your main camera. I would also hang on to the 18-55. IF you do get a 70-200, you can trade the 55-250 and have a better lens for pro work.