Raptor said:

---

I want to shoot sports. Specifically, high school and middle school for my district. Indoor and outdoor. I know a little, and I also know I know nothing when it comes to really using my camera for the best shots possible.

The biggest issue I have is image blur. Even when using a tripod, a monopod, and holding my breath. The VRs get 1 out of 8 shots in crystal clear focus.

---

Why Raptor Loses in Sports Photography:

You may have read that one of the primary reasons for blurry pictures is shaky hands. So I can certainly appreciate your monopod, tripods and VR. But even Dubi hand holds 70-200mm f2.8 shooting sports.

But in sports photography, your subject is moving fast and they're not posing for you.

Hence, you need equipment that can help you focus quickly.

Unless you're so good with manual focus (I have no idea how photogs did this before the auto focus era), you should invest.

70-200mm f2.8 IS lens is one lens every semi-serious photographer should own. And if you also have 24-70mm f2.8, the combination of 2 lenses really should cover most of your photography needs.

More serious about sports photography, then look into 300mm f2.8 and 400mm f2.8. I haven't had the need for 400mm f2.8 (just a want) but more than likely, I'll migrate to mirrorless for sports as most of my general photo and video stuff for family and friends are done on mirrorless.

I will still keep a FF DSLR, 24-70 and 70-200mm and but get rid of all DSLR bodies and lenses in near future.

DP

Rent or borrow a 70-200 f2.8 and give it a test drive.

We had been taking pictures for years with the wrong crappy kit lenses. Good glass will change your life.

If you rent get the insurance, see my post earlier in the thread.

AggieGunslinger said:

---

If you rent get the insurance, see my post earlier in the thread.

---

I did get the insurance when I rented a Canon 100-400.

Taking photos at a gun range is a bit risky with shrapnel flying around.

Thanks! I'm most likely buying the 70-200mm for Xmas. I might rent the smaller one and see if I can convince the rib to allow me to get both!

Raptor said:

---

Thanks! I'm most likely buying the 70-200mm for Xmas. I might rent the smaller one and see if I can convince the rib to allow me to get both!

---

Take a look at the Tamron 70-200 2.8. It is similar in quality and performance, but at a fraction of the cost of the Nikkor. This lens is weather sealed and very robust, so you can use it without worry of breaking it.

This is the lens that I rented and broke. It is a great lens, with my limited ability I couldn't tell the difference between it and the more expensive Nikkor.

AggieGunslinger said:

---

This is the lens that I rented and broke. It is a great lens, with my limited ability I couldn't tell the difference between it and the more expensive Nikkor.

---

I dropped my 70D and Tamron lens on concrete from about 5' and it is still working.

Still amazed that both survived. Time will tell i guess.

Great call. Now I can afford the other lens! Win win!

I came real close to pulling the trigger on a used 6D MkII this morning, but watched enough youtubes that shat on the dynamic range issues to hold back...a shame the only real "upgrade" model in the current Canon lineup is the 5D MkIV, which is waaaaay out of my price range.

dubi said:

---

AggieGunslinger said:

---

This is the lens that I rented and broke. It is a great lens, with my limited ability I couldn't tell the difference between it and the more expensive Nikkor.

---

I dropped my 70D and Tamron lens on concrete from about 5' and it is still working.

Still amazed that both survived. Time will tell i guess.

---

Almost 5 years ago...had my D7000 and my 70-300mm with VR "fly" off my lap and out of our golf cart and roll on the fairway for a few feet. I almost puked. It works fine and I cannot tell any difference in any photo before and after.

dubi said:

---

AggieGunslinger said:

---

This is the lens that I rented and broke. It is a great lens, with my limited ability I couldn't tell the difference between it and the more expensive Nikkor.

---

I dropped my 70D and Tamron lens on concrete from about 5' and it is still working.

Still amazed that both survived. Time will tell i guess.

---

She underestimates. It was on concrete so it was at least a nice, soft landing...

So I picked up the 70d from earlier in this thread.

It came with a kit lens:
Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 Image Stabilization USM Lens (Black) (International Model) No Warranty [Bulk Packaging] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01DTBYPG6/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_KhLeAbXXBDETD

We also picked up this wide angle lens:
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLRs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002Y5WXE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_rmLeAb4AJQ5S2

We are heading to Disney on Friday and are looking to pick up one lens that will be good for that and the best choice in general going forward.

Should we get a 50mm:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras - Fixed https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000I1YIDQ/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_xkLeAbHG4DJWP

Or

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard & Medium Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras - Fixed https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00009XVCZ/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_3jLeAbZHDHGFZ


Or, should we get this 17-55mm:

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000EW8074/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_0kLeAbEQDYFQE

50mm on crop for Disney is definitely not your best choice. You'll want a zoom lens in the 17-50mm range for your crop sensor (24-70ish equivalent) at 2.8 ideally.

If you absolutely must travel with a single lens, I'd opt for something wider than 50mm, like the 24mm pancake. Super lightweight, focuses fairly fast, and wide enough to capture entire scenes.

What's not good about the 50mm I linked? Just pulled that idea from some Google searches, but I'm completely new to this so any instruction is helpful! Thanks!

In Disney you won't always be able to dictate where you get to stand. With primes, you have to be able to walk around to compose. With longer primes, like 50mm on a crop, where you can stand becomes even more important.

For instance, when I took my son on the little race cars at disney, I was able to take selfies with the DSLR because I had a wider pancake on vs a long lens that requires some distance between the camera and subject.

The 50mm f1.2 is an amazing lens, just not for what you want to do.

Premium said:

---

What's not good about the 50mm I linked? Just pulled that idea from some Google searches, but I'm completely new to this so any instruction is helpful! Thanks!

---

Disney is crowded and with a small zoom, you will be able to get closer to your subject. I own a 50mm prime and this is not the time to use it.

I'd buy the Tamron! It is on my Christmas list.

I've read that folks with the 70D have had issues with that new revision of the Tamron. Nothing wrong with the older body style (short of missing out on VC), and you save 50%.

TexAgsAnon said:

---

I've read that folks with the 70D have had issues with that new revision of the Tamron. Nothing wrong with the older body style (short of missing out on VC), and you save 50%.

---

YIKES. I have a 70D also.

Just that 24-70 g2? I have the 70-200 G2 and have no problems.

I'm so confused.

Premium said:

---

I'm so confused.

---

I use my 50 mm lens for portraits. That is it.

dubi said:

---

TexAgsAnon said:

---

I've read that folks with the 70D have had issues with that new revision of the Tamron. Nothing wrong with the older body style (short of missing out on VC), and you save 50%.

---

YIKES. I have a 70D also.

Just that 24-70 g2? I have the 70-200 G2 and have no problems.

---

Yes, what I read was in relation to the 24-70 specifically, but I don't have either a 70D or the G2 so I can't definitely say.

Premium said:

---

I'm so confused.

---

Don't be.

DON'T: get a 50mm for an all around travel lens
DO: get a fast 2.8 medium zoom lens for all around travel lens

TexAgsAnon said:

---

Premium said:

---

I'm so confused.

---

Don't be.

DON'T: get a 50mm for an all around travel lens
DO: get a fast 2.8 medium zoom lens for all around travel lens

---

+1000

You want a bit of zoom in a travel lens. Using a prime lens involves moving your feet which may not be feasible in a crowd. Likely NOT feasible at Disney.

50mm is a great lens and you should own one; but I leave it at home when I travel. Travel bag contains:
70D
24-105 F4 canon
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 canon
70-200 f2.8 tamron

dubi said:

---

TexAgsAnon said:

---

Premium said:

---

I'm so confused.

---

Don't be.

DON'T: get a 50mm for an all around travel lens
DO: get a fast 2.8 medium zoom lens for all around travel lens

---

+1000

You want a bit of zoom in a travel lens. Using a prime lens involves moving your feet which may not be feasible in a crowd. Likely NOT feasible at Disney.

50mm is a great lens and you should own one; but I leave it at home when I travel. Travel bag contains:
70D
24-105 F4 canon
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 canon
70-200 f2.8 tamron

---

What about this:

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000EW8074/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_7GZeAbH0K0BXN

Quote:

---

What about this:

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000EW8074/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_7GZeAbH0K0BXN

---

Nice lens! I'd still prefer the 24-70mm 2.8.

Interesting article:
What Focal Length Do I Need for a Particular Shot?

Given that Premium doesn't know the difference between a long prime and a zoom, I'd just get the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and call it a day.

f4 is just too slow IMO for a place like Disney, where you might eat in a fairly dark banquet hall for dinner, but still want to get some shots of both your table and a stage show. Just my 2 cents after spending a week in Disney this year.

TexAgsAnon said:

---

Given that Premium doesn't know the difference between a long prime and a zoom, I'd just get the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and call it a day.

f4 is just too slow IMO for a place like Disney, where you might eat in a fairly dark banquet hall for dinner, but still want to get some shots of both your table and a stage show. Just my 2 cents after spending a week in Disney this year.

---

What did you think of that 17-55 I posted in my previous post?

Thanks for bearing with me. Maybe in a few months I'll be more versed.

It's a good lens, but you're paying dearly for that IS. You have to determine if that's worth an extra $500 for you, and with both lenses being f2.8, for me it would not be worth it.

Also, you could just rent the glass from a place like BorrowLenses.com if you don't want to commit to an $800 lens.

TexAgsAnon said:

---

dubi said:

---

TexAgsAnon said:

---

I've read that folks with the 70D have had issues with that new revision of the Tamron. Nothing wrong with the older body style (short of missing out on VC), and you save 50%.

---

YIKES. I have a 70D also.

Just that 24-70 g2? I have the 70-200 G2 and have no problems.

---

Yes, what I read was in relation to the 24-70 specifically, but I don't have either a 70D or the G2 so I can't definitely say.

---

Rare problem with 70D / 24-70 lens AND shooting video.

I rarely shoot video with my 70D, so this would NOT prevent me from buying the lens.

So get this one?

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lens with hood for Canon DSLR Cameras https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000FZ3FY8/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_R.0eAb9GW4CG8

On that Canon 17-55, do I need a filter like this for Disney, or in general?:

Thanks for your help!

Edit:
https://breakthrough.photography/products/x4-circular-polarizer

If I were you, yes, but depends on how much you're willing to spend.

Go look at the flickr pools for all 3, you need to get real familiar with this when researching lenses.

Tamron 17-50: https://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron-17-50-f28/pool/

Tamron 24-70: https://www.flickr.com/groups/3946296@N24/pool/

Canon 17-55: https://www.flickr.com/groups/canon_17-55mm/pool/

Edit: you absolutely do not need an ND filter. Those are for taking long exposures midday. Do not waste your money on a polarizer or UV filter either.