Need help picking a lens

[Ratpack]

My daughters are in competition cheerleading and I am having trouble getting the shots I want. It is usually well lit on stage, but not from where we stand to watch her. I want to get the crisp action shots as they tumble across the stage. I have a Nikon D7000, so I know my lens is most likely the issue from getting the shots I want. I currently have the 18-105 kit lens. I have a 50 1.8 as well but prefer a little zoom option since they are not in the same place on the mat all the time. Any recommendations? I don't have a mint to spend, but don't mind spending a little.

 

[havoc315]

My daughters are in competition cheerleading and I am having trouble getting the shots I want. It is usually well lit on stage, but not from where we stand to watch her. I want to get the crisp action shots as they tumble across the stage. I have a Nikon D7000, so I know my lens is most likely the issue from getting the shots I want. I currently have the 18-105 kit lens. I have a 50 1.8 as well but prefer a little zoom option since they are not in the same place on the mat all the time. Any recommendations? I don't have a mint to spend, but don't mind spending a little.

What's spending "a little?"

Problem is, you are in low light. The way to compensate for low light are to:
1. Increase aperture. (1.8 is a large aperture... Your lens, at 105mm, has a maximum aperture of 5.6, which is pretty small. So you are probably already at your maximum aperture, which just isn't large enough).
2. Decrease shutter speed. Your camera is doing this -- but slow shutter speed makes for blurry action.
3. Increase ISO. This leads to grainier shots, and your camera may have already maxed out on ISO.

A new lens won't affect shutter speed or ISO directly. Instead, a different lens can have a larger aperture. By having a larger aperture, it can get away with faster shutter speed and lower ISO.

Your 50/1.8 is a very large aperture, so works well if you get close enough.

But telephoto lenses with large aperture are very very expensive.

The standby lens for people in your situation is the 70-200/2.8. For such a lens, even used/off brand, will easily run you $500-$1000. For a "new" Nikon branded 70-200/2.8, you are looking at $2,000+

A more affordable option could be a long prime lens, like a Nikon 180/2.8, but even that is $400-$500 used.

But your basic budget telephoto zoom lenses will all be small aperture (5.6-6.3) lenses, so they will all be equally bad for capturing the low light action you seek.

Your best bet is to use you 50/1.8 and try to get close, or crop later.

 

[Ratpack]

Thanks, I know the lenses are expensive, but if I can use it for multiple situations, it would be great. Low light is always my problem, even at WDW on rides like Pirates. But from what you are saying, I should look for an aperature of 1.8 - 2.8 and then go for whatever zoom I can afford, right?

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

As far as I know, the only zoom lens with an aperture larger than f2.8 is the Sigma 18-35 f1.8. Typically to get a larger aperture than 2.8 with telephoto, you would be looking at a prime lens. I primarily shoot motorsports which seem always to be in lowlight. Everytime I get a day race, I'm ecstatic! I have a bag full of f2.8 zoom lenses (Tamron 17-50, Sigma 28-70, Sigma 70-200 and my other long zoom is a 100-300 f4). To shoot action in lowlight is going to require a minimum of a 2.8 lens. How you get there is your choice. I would look at the exif on my photos to determine the focal lengths I use most then find a lens that matches that and fits my budget. Since you are shooting from dark to a lighted stage, if you haven't already, you might want to try using spot metering instead of matrix metering.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

I shoot dance recitals and stick with the 70-200 f2.8, generally I'm at the soundboard and would like even a little more reach. If I have a good season this year and my wife is willing I'll get the Sigma 300mm f2.8

 

[havoc315]

Thanks, I know the lenses are expensive, but if I can use it for multiple situations, it would be great. Low light is always my problem, even at WDW on rides like Pirates. But from what you are saying, I should look for an aperature of 1.8 - 2.8 and then go for whatever zoom I can afford, right?

Umm... Kinda. In terms of telephoto zoom, you won't find aperture faster than 2.8. Only in a few specialized primes.

First, before jumping into a new lens, I'd make sure you're getting the most possible out of your current set up. Shoot manually -- make sure you're using the highest ISO and fastest shutter speed you can get away with.

It is -possible- to get action shots with a slower lens. Aperture 5.6 example, boosted ISO with lots of noise reduction:


untitled-155-Edit.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[photo_chick]

My daughters are in competition cheerleading and I am having trouble getting the shots I want. It is usually well lit on stage, but not from where we stand to watch her. I want to get the crisp action shots as they tumble across the stage. I have a Nikon D7000, so I know my lens is most likely the issue from getting the shots I want. I currently have the 18-105 kit lens. I have a 50 1.8 as well but prefer a little zoom option since they are not in the same place on the mat all the time. Any recommendations? I don't have a mint to spend, but don't mind spending a little.

A well lit stage is usually going to be a well lit stage from wherever you are. The problem is that many stages that look well lit to the naked eye really are not as far as the camera is concerned.

What you have to decide is how serious are you about this. Are you good with passable shots or do you want to strive for more professional looking shots? You can learn some techniques that will let you get by with OK shots using a slower lens. It won't always be ideal but it's possible (I did it for 5 years shooting dance). However if you want more professional you have to pony up the cash for a more expensive lens like the 70-200 f/2.8.

 

[kbnovak]

Having shot well over a million cheerleading images (I used to shoot for several event companies and several organizations) the 70-200 2.8 is THE lens to use for shooting cheer/dance.
Also, It's darn-near impossible to capture great/flattering images of tumbling.

http://www.kevinnovakphoto.com/galleries/cheerleading/

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

Having shot well over a million cheerleading images (I used to shoot for several event companies and several organizations) the 70-200 2.8 is THE lens to use for shooting cheer/dance.
Also, It's darn-near impossible to capture great/flattering images of tumbling.

http://www.kevinnovakphoto.com/galleries/cheerleading/

Great album!

 

[kbnovak]

Thanks Daisy14'sDH!

 

[fritodenny]

Im going to be taking cheer pictures in well lit high school gyms. There's no way I can afford a 70-200mm f/2.8. A quick search puts them in the $750 range. I can get a Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS Macro HSM Lens for Nikon AF with Optical Stabilizer for $350. Would I be totally disappointed with it for cheer pictures?

 

[havoc315]

Im going to be taking cheer pictures in well lit high school gyms. There's no way I can afford a 70-200mm f/2.8. A quick search puts them in the $750 range. I can get a Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS Macro HSM Lens for Nikon AF with Optical Stabilizer for $350. Would I be totally disappointed with it for cheer pictures?

For about the same price you can get the Tamron 70-300 4-5.6.

It's slightly longer and slightly faster on the telephoto end.

Still not nearly as good as a 2.8 lens, but a bit better than the 18-250.

Remember, a bigger aperture (smaller number) lets in more light, allowing faster shutter speed and lower ISO. So you want the largest aperture (smallest number) you can afford.

Here is a real world example, dance taking in a "well lit" school gymnasium.

dance-194.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

This was taken on a full frame camera (which has better ISO performance), at 2.8, 200mm, ISO 6400, 1/400 shutter speed.

If your lens only goes to 5.6... then to get the same level of exposure, you would need to make up 2 stops elsewhere. In other words, you would need to increase the ISO to 12800 (pretty ugly, especially on APS-C camera), and cut the shutter speed to 1/200 (leading to motion blur).
Or increase the ISO to 25600 (not all APS-C cameras can even go so high), and leave the shutter speed alone.
Or leave the shutter speed at 6400 (which is already pretty marginal on most APS-C cameras), and cut the shutter speed to 1/100. (Leading to lots of motion blur).

If your aperture is 6.3 instead of 5.6, it's even worse. But only slightly worse. (Instead of a shutter speed of 1/100, you might need 1/80).

 

[SkaGoat]

My daughters are in competition cheerleading and I am having trouble getting the shots I want. It is usually well lit on stage, but not from where we stand to watch her. I want to get the crisp action shots as they tumble across the stage. I have a Nikon D7000, so I know my lens is most likely the issue from getting the shots I want. I currently have the 18-105 kit lens. I have a 50 1.8 as well but prefer a little zoom option since they are not in the same place on the mat all the time. Any recommendations? I don't have a mint to spend, but don't mind spending a little.

Do you have an example of a shot you could post that you're not happy with? It's be easier if we could look at it.

But I think finding a good used 70-200mm f/2.8 is going to be the best option, look for Sigma, Nikon, or Tamron options.

 

[fritodenny]

Thank you.

 

[SkaGoat]

Another option is to rent a 70-200mm f/2.8 for the competitions, I don't know how many comps a year there are.... or you could rent it for the really important ones.

at Lensrentals.com a 4-day rental on a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR II is $81. That's a $2200 lens.

 

[photo_chick]

Im going to be taking cheer pictures in well lit high school gyms. There's no way I can afford a 70-200mm f/2.8. A quick search puts them in the $750 range. I can get a Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS Macro HSM Lens for Nikon AF with Optical Stabilizer for $350. Would I be totally disappointed with it for cheer pictures?

While having the right lens helps tremendously, getting consistently successful cheer shots also requires knowing your equipment fairly well.

The f/6.3 on the long end of that Sigma is going to make shooting action in a high school gym extremely challenging. Not impossible, but it will be really difficult to get the shot and you will likely have to do some serious pushing in post. The Nikon 55-200 would actually be a better choice compared to that particular Sigma. Or the Tamron Havoc mentioned. Neither are an ideal choice, but would be better than a super zoom with an achingly slow f/6.3 on the long end.

 

[SplashMo]

I would try the 85/1.8 and combine it with the 50mm as well. Also remember to bump up your ISO.