Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Add-On Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 24, 2004, 1:35 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
wvyankeegurl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 356
Default Give me the skinny on these lenses if ya can please....

Ive been looking all over and asking all sorts of questions
im starting to understand more and more.


For sports indoor or outdoor action shots,

1: Here is the question:
which would be a good one to have
and what is the differnce in these besides the prices. which would be good for indoor basketball /volleyball or outside football/softball

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 APO Lens

Sigma Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 APO F/EOS

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 USM Telephoto Zoom Lens

Question 2: I know IS is image stabalizer right, does it effect how
fast or freezing the action , make it slower or faster getting the shot. (i think i asked that right lol)

Question 3: USM Ultrasonic Motor -i found what that is too, but is that better for faster action shots with no blurr?

Question 4: what is APO F/EOS and just APO and the differences

Getting the rebel will be taking all of the above shots for sports
all day time mostly

I just need a good one for inside action low lighted gyms and something for outside action getting good zoom
wvyankeegurl is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 24, 2004, 2:11 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

1) How close are you to the game? If 200mm is long enough, then we won't get into the question of what lenses you don't list that would be better. I'm a bit surprised that 200mm is long enough, but I don't know how close you are and I've never shot v-ball games (just played in them )

Those two sigma lenses are, I believe, the same. I've never see the "F/EOS" notation. EOS is a trademark owned by Canon, so I assume it means that that lens is made to fit canon cameras.

The only difference between the two canon lenses is IS, a little sharpness and the non IS is a bit faster focusing. The differences are probably so small as to not matter (I found this by looking on the web, not from personal experience.)

2) The IS makes no difference in stopping action. It only removes your hand shake from the shot. If you can't use a mono-pod or tripod then IS is a life saver.

3) USM only effects the speed of autofocus and the sound. It doesn't effect blur in any way. So you'll be able to focus on your subject faster (i.e. better chance of getting the shot) and it will do it quietly. (Note that those sigma lenses have Sigma's version of USM. Not as good, but still quite good.)

4) I don't know the difference. APO means that the lenses is specially coated to reduce optical distortions (chromatic aboration, and maybe other things.) All things being equal, APO is better than not. Is it worth the money? I don't know, but I'd rather have it.

The best thing you already seem to know. Get the largest aperture you can get... and you're already doing that since you only listed f2.8 lenses.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 5:57 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
cowboy43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
Default

If you do one thing make sure you stay with 2.8 apature it will cost more. but is vital. Also invest in a "MONOPOD" The combination of the two are crucial. And with good flash sync you will be set.
cowboy43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 7:17 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
wvyankeegurl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 356
Default

thanks that gives me some more to go on.
My friend just got the rebel she showed me the pics of a bball game in the middle school gym, which has yucky lighting, they didnt look very good at all, well its her first digital camera, and im real picky,lol.
She said i could barrow it.
I played with it at a my sons basketball practice.
In the same gym. I tried different settings with the lens that
came with it. Not real good.
I used a lens she had 70-300mm f4.5, not sure what kind it was.
I tried different settings , when i didnt zoom all the way out
and used it on the auto setting, it did pretty good as in the lighting.
Got some blurr, but not too bad. I used the flash too, it was a good distance up on the stage on one side. A guy i know gave me some info on lenses which helped a little. Still learning.
I dont think that lens was an IS.
For taking them in that gym and just playing around they did ok.
I def. want a lens that has 2.8 at least, i prob. will go with a 70-300 though. im not sure if it will make that much diff.
The pics werent as sharp as i had hoped but her lens was kinda dirty and i didnt have anything to clean it with.

I am posting them on a site see what you think, i resized them down a little. I think they are ok for not being my camera and just testing a little. But i really wasnt impressed yet with the clearity.not sure if it was the lenses.
Would the blurr be where the aperture is 4.5 on the lens?
Ill figure it out some day lol.

http://www.pbase.com/yankees/test_shots_with_the_rebel
wvyankeegurl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 9:49 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

The blur is because you were shooting at 1/60th and 1/15th. To stop motion you'll need to shoot with a faster shutter speed. Also the longer the shutter, the more chance your own motion while holding the camera will blur the picture. Unfortunately, the only way you'll get faster is by using a lens with a larger aperture (smaller f-stop number) or using a flash. A real flash, not the flash built into the camera (that has a range of only about 10 feet or so.) Both cost money (either an expensive lens, or an extra piece of equipment and more batteries) but will do the job.

Notice that 01.jpg is sharper? It's shot at 1/125. Not the best shutter speed to stop a jump, but it did the job.

I agree with cowboy43, if they allow a monopod, it certainly won't hurt and will probably help.

I don't believe there is a 70-300 that is f2.8. Sigma makes a 120-300 f2.8 but that is an expensive lens.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 9:52 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
cowboy43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
Default

Think of lens apature this way, 4.5 ap. is the size of a softball, 2.8 ap. is the size of a volleyball. Which ball will let in the most light? the vollyball right? ok now the lens opens and shuts at different speeds ,This is shutter speed , faster speeds let in less light but also blur less ,Stands to reason because the total action you want to capture is completed in less time, the more time it takes the less chance of camera movement, but also the less light gets to the processor. So to help with all this we like the vollyball opening (2.8). Now as you zoom in apature will change so use the least amount of zoom you can. So get as close to your subject as you can. Here is a test you can do ,In this test you will use no flash and shoot at the same none moving object . Leave your focal length set at the lowest setting on all shots Set Camera To 2.8 ap. and shutter speed at 1/30 shoot, now set shutter to 1/60th, Shoot, now 1/125th, shoot ,now 1/250th shoot, Now 1/500th as you will see your pictures are getting darker. Why? less light getting to the censor due to faster shutter speeds This is the nice thing about Digital you can play with it and have no processing cost on test like this. Good Luck
cowboy43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 10:06 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
wvyankeegurl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 356
Default

cowboy43 thanks that helped , ive learned alot today,lol.
makes more since now. but all the lens brands have so many different meanings ive noticed , IS ,EX, XR Di , ect. ......
it is very confusing but ive been lookin up definitions.
I guess i really still need to look more, i prob. will have around
1000.00 for lens, not sure if I will need two though, one for indoor bball shots and one for outdoor zoom football shots
i agree with the monopod thing too, it would help.

i know those pics were not good, did you look at any of my others from the E100rs like football ones. now i like those. not good for big prints really but for what i used was good.
these are what type of pics i take and will be taking
http://www.pbase.com/yankees

also this was from one of my football pics i had it on auto/sports
and around 7fps set.
1/800s f/3.5 at 70.0mm iso100 full exif
does the 70.0mm mean i was shooting that far away, i know dumb question but making sure on this.

eric s do you think it would be better to go with a 70-200 at 2.8, than going to a 70-300 with higher F. ?

would this be good for indoor bball shots, if you wasnt far away?
TAMRON 28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di Canon Lens- 329.88

i know you all prob. get tired of these sort of questions.lol
wvyankeegurl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 10:46 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
cowboy43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
Default

Go herehttp://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/le...gth/index.html for Canons focal lenth comparison it will explain focal length better than i can (the 70mm question) If I remember right the olympus Has a pre-capture mode that works well in outdoor natural light but you can't compare that to a DSLR that does not have that. In my opinion I would not use a tamron lense. Not as sharp as the Canons and Nikons You are going to get the Rebel Right? Stay with canon lenses you will pay more but you won't regret it. 2.8 is the only one that is going to give you good results no matter what the salesman tells you. Remember vollyball over softball.
cowboy43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 11:17 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
wvyankeegurl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 356
Default

Ok so i maybe ill get the canon 70-200 f/2.8 USM around 1050.00

i know the 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM is about 700.00 more

Is there a big difference in the two enough to spend that kinda
money on the stabalization. At. least for me a rookie.

should I wait and save up and get it right before football starts when i would use it the most.
i think im repeating myself,lol
wvyankeegurl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 11:30 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
cowboy43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 923
Default

Some Say yes, Some say No I myself (on my 80-200) don't have the stabilization I use a monopod . And get by fine so I really don't know if it is worth the extra $ or not. And for football I use a 600MM lens anyway, so you have to have a monopod to hold the the darn thing up.
cowboy43 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 AM.