Lens for my Canon - indoor kids basketball

[Tiggsy]

Shooting my kids basketball game with my 17-55 lens and its all too soft.Most shots taken around the 55mm mark but not much need for anything too much longer as I'm courtside. Looking at the Canon 85mm 1.8 - sound good? I'm assuming I wont get anything fast enough for gym lights with a zoom on it? (my ideal lens would be a 40-150 1.8...but i dont believe that exists!)


T

[Simpo Two]

What do you mean by soft exactly? Out of focus? Can you post an example and what you think is wrong with it?

Edited by Simpo Two on Sunday 7th November 22:37

[Thorburn]

Can't think of any zoom lenses faster than f/2.8.

If you can deal with the high ISO you could get one of those, Tamron one is good quality but slow AF, Sigma has good AF but average image quality, Canon is good on both counts but expensive.

[LongQ]

Which camera?

Are you shooting jpeg?

What are the camera settings? Do you use picture styles? Have you checked the camera jpg processing defaults?

Would you be allowed to use a flash gun?

[RobDickinson]

If the 17-55 is the right length but too slow either ramp up the ISO or buy a prime.

50/1.4 would be best.

Or better use flash...

[Mojocvh]

RobDickinson said:

If the 17-55 is the right length but too slow either ramp up the ISO or buy a prime.

50/1.4 would be best.

Or better use flash...

50/1.4 would be best.

+1.

[Simpo Two]

Oh well, we did our best.

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 9th November 17:24

[Tiggsy]

Sorry people....forgot I asked the question!!!!!

To answer the above. I am using a 400d with a 50mm 1.8 and a 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 (shooting in RAW)

I have tried using a higher ISO this weekend and found far better results - 800 was allowing me to shoot around 1/320 with the 50mm and these shots look fine with hardly any noise worth worrying about.

I sit on the side line close to the basket so get shoots of the kids coming towards me as they dribble down the court...the 50mm is great for this but too long for when they get to basket (if I want full body shots/group shots) so I use the 18-55mm but it's a little slow....more so if I zoom in with it.

After a lot of reading I am liking the idea of:

17-55 2.8f - I'm hoping the benefits of the 50mm i use already (most shots with it where taken at 2.2 ish) with more flexibility.

70-200mm 2.8f - For more reach down the court...anything past half way line and I cant get close enough.

85mm 1.8f - Just in case I'm in a low light cave of a school gym and need the speed?

Upgrade the 400d?

Any thoughts? Can i use those lens wide open at 2.8 and still get sharp images? Will I gain much by upgrading the body....I assume higher ISO options are the main one? The 400d goes to 1600 but that produces a LOT of noise.

I am now "official team photographer" because the other parents have point and shoots, so I need to up my game!

PS.....I am now tracking the thread so dont think I'm buggering off again!!!

[RobDickinson]

My 17-55IS is sharp enough at f2.8 and very usable.

Any of the 70-200's should bee plenty sharp enough at f2.8 also.

As for bodies, the 7D is a huge step up in high ISO noise for me from a 350D (at least 2 usable stops), any of the current 18mp canons will be the same, and a fair step up from the 400D I rekon.

Also look at some good noise reduction software, noise ninja or neat image etc.

For examples, this is an ISO 3200 shot with no noise reduction aplied:


And an (effective) ISO 6400 shot using neat image:

Edited by RobDickinson on Monday 22 November 04:40

[Tiggsy]

Very nice.

So, noise Nina aside, a 7d at 3200 may have less noise than my 400d at 1600(it's max)?

If so it sounds like a body upgrade may be as vital as glass for low light photos?

I assume the 7d is the one at the moment (for a non pro unit) ?

[RobDickinson]

Cant say for sure about how it measures up to a 400D as I've not realy used one I expect 1600 vs 3200 is fairly even.

7D, 60D and 550D all share the same sensor (kinda).

[Tiggsy]

yeah...i was wondering if a 550d may be a better upgrade over a 400d than going all the way to a 7d.

[Simpo Two]

Tiggsy said:

Sorry people....forgot I asked the question!!!!!

Well still no examples so we'll have to guess but let's wade in...

Tiggsy said:

I have tried using a higher ISO this weekend and found far better results - 800 was allowing me to shoot around 1/320 with the 50mm and these shots look fine with hardly any noise worth worrying about.

Given that fact then I'm guessing that when you say 'too soft' you mean there is camera or subject movement. Increasing ISO has given you a faster shutter speed which has solved the problem.

The other interpretation of 'too soft', which I thought more likely, was that the subject was moving out of the focus zone before the camera fired. ie 'not in focus' - which is quite different from camera/subject movement.

Tiggsy said:

Any thoughts? Can i use those lens wide open at 2.8 and still get sharp images? Will I gain much by upgrading the body....I assume higher ISO options are the main one?

The problem is too little light. Three ways forward:

1) Increase ISO, as you have done, being watchful of introducing too much noise. This is the easiest fix.

2) Buy faster lenses, as you are considering. Cost aside, at large apertures the depth of field will be much shallower so fast-moving subjects may be out of focus. Faster lenses also have lower zoom ratios so you may well be changing lenses. I typically use 17-55mm f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8; your needs may vary. Go to f1.8 or f1.4 and you might find they are operationally useless at those apertures.

3) If allowed to use one, consider adding extra light with a powerful flashgun.

I regularly juggle all three!


As for upgrading the body, better high-ISO performance is obvious but for sports, focusing speed and focus tracking (ie the AF system as a whole) are also important. The more you spend the faster/more accurate it is likely to be, but don't go down the route of thinking a flash body will make you a better tog. You can get better results but you have to work harder for them.



ETA: Rob, your cat looks really stupid

Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 22 November 09:51

[MonkeyHanger]

If you're even remotely serious then this is a 2 body & 2 lens job, assuming the lighting in the Gym is up to (down to?) the usual standards.

Body 1 with the 85 f1.8. That lens has lightning quick AF and is a bargain. i got mine S/H for £170 with a hood..

Body 2 with....erm something wide & fast. Wide primes aren't something i know a lot about to be honest


You might get away with something like a 7D + 17-55 2.8 IS but i'd want to see if the AF on that lens is up to the job first.

[Tiggsy]

Two bodies aint gonna happen!

I have a feeling my "softness" is a combbo of not quite fast enough shutter speeds and too narrow a DOF with the 50mm 1.8.

SO i'm thinking the 7D (with its better high ISO) and a 70-200mm 2.8 lens will give me what I need. I realise the 85mm is good but the lack of flexibility of no zoom for the only benefit of the wider aperture (that i cant really use anyway due to too narrow a DOF) means I think the 17-55mm and 70-200mm 2.8's will cover 99% of what I need to shoot (on a 7D)

I assume the 7D is worth extra over the 550D if all I am after is the better ISO function, primarily?

[SamHH]

Tiggsy said:

I assume the 7D is worth extra over the 550D if all I am after is the better ISO function, primarily?

I think those two cameras have the same sensor, so they will be equally noisy.

[Tiggsy]

SamHH said:

Tiggsy said:

I assume the 7D is worth extra over the 550D if all I am after is the better ISO function, primarily?

I think those two cameras have the same sensor, so they will be equally noisy.

But a lot better than a 400d? (it only goes to 1600 and the noise is pretty grim on that)

[LongQ]

Tiggsy said:

SamHH said:

Tiggsy said:

I assume the 7D is worth extra over the 550D if all I am after is the better ISO function, primarily?

I think those two cameras have the same sensor, so they will be equally noisy.

But a lot better than a 400d? (it only goes to 1600 and the noise is pretty grim on that)

If you get lucky a 400D at 1600 can produce OKish results but normally 800 is about as far as you can go. 7D and other models of a similar age or more recent are quite usable up to 3200 (maybe beyond). If noise does appear almost any NR system can deal with it easily. However a 7D does respond to good lenses to give greatest satisfaction and it's worth considering the size of the files it produces - large by comparison with 400D files and so you may need to consider CF card sizes and computer disk capacity. And download times, especially if shooting RAW.

On a left field tack - consider a 1D Mk III. Used prices are about on a par with 7Ds IF you accept that a 7D really should have a Battery Grip attached. That said there seems to be some volatility in the market at the moment and 'used' 7Ds, hardly touched it would seem and only weeks old, are falling through eBay in the £800 to £900 range. Add £100 to £150 for a BG. Used, but hardly, 1D3s are fetching about £1100 to 1300. So not much in it, especially if you consider that a 'proper' and complate 1D3 should come with various bits that are normally add-ons for other cameras - like a mains power unit and dual battery charger. Not to mention the additional features in the camera, though there is a bit of a trade off on feature sets. The files are smaller than a 7D.