Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 28, 2008, 10:58 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

If you broaden your choices a little, Nikon has an 80-200/2.8 (~$900) that is quite nice. The Sigma70-200/2.8 (~$800) I mentioned for the Canon is also available for Nikon. And Tamron also has a 70-200/2.8 (~$700) that is quite nice.

My son has a Nikon D300 and the Tamron. I got to handle it yesterdayand I was impressed. It would probably work well on a Canon too.

And if you're willing to go up a notch (as indicated by your mentioning the Nikon D90), the Canon 40D is also a nice choice.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2008, 2:01 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10
Default

Thanks. I now have a Nikon D90 in my hands trying it out. The store did not have an F2.8 70-200mm lense however I'm trying the Nikon18-200 mmF3.5 lense out for now. It has VR and "active" settings on it so I will start here. This may be an all around lense that will work in the rink and out and about. If not I will look at the Sigma F 2.8. I'll post a photo this weekend for your review. I'm slowly getting there. Thanks to your patient advice.:-)
Dave2550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2008, 2:52 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

The Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-EDhas a maximum aperture of f/3.5 at the wide end, but a maximum aperture of f/5.6 at the long end, which is no better than the lens you had. And, according to the tests at SLRGear.com and PhotoZone.de, it's not nearly as sharp at 200mm.

To shoot hockey under the conditions you've got, you'll need a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 at a 200mm focal length.

The Nikon D90 is a fine camera, but the lens you've got now is even less capable of doing what you want than the Sony equipment you had.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2008, 5:12 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10
Default

Thanks I kinda figured that. I have taken a few outdoor pics today and the pics are very nice. The rink I'm sure will be a whole different issue. You are right the camera has way more features than the Sony. I will look at the sigma 2.8 and return the Nikon lens. First I will give it a try at the rink. All part of the guided learning tour you have me on. I assumed I would have a3.5 f stop at 200mm. Cheers!!! Here is a pick for your review taken in sports mode.
Attached Images
 
Dave2550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2008, 3:11 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10
Default

John,

I finally rec'd my sigma f2.8 70-200 lens this week. I took some pics and here is one for you to look at. I really like the lens thus far. Once I run it through photoshop and make some minor adjustments the pics look good. I don't even have to use noise reduction software. I am at 1600 iso and I've been up around 1/250 or 1/320 of a shutter speed. Any suggestions to get even brighter photos? Once again you have been a big help and Thank you. I'm way better off with this combo than the 18-200 lens. I plan to return my Nikon 18-200 and replace it with a Sigma 18-200 with OS. Any thoughts on this?
Attached Images
 
Dave2550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2008, 3:19 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10
Default

Here is the same pic after adjustments with photoshop. Cheers.
Attached Images
 
Dave2550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2008, 5:33 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Dave2550 wrote:
Quote:
Any suggestions to get even brighter photos?
To get brighter photos you need to either increase ISO or lower shutter speed. 1/320 is already a bit slow. If you're camera has ISO 3200 you'll have to use it. If you're camera doesn't have ISO 3200 then do what you're currently doing because going below 1/320 isn't a good idea. Glad you're enjoying the combo. Best of luck to you.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2008, 9:23 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10
Default

I will give that a try. I have 2000, 2500 and 3200 ISO options. I'll keep the shutter speed no lower than 1/320 and bump up the ISO. Any suggestions on a good walk around lens? The Sigma is heavy and I don't plan on packing it with me on holidays. Cheers.
Dave2550 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2008, 12:55 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
NewsyL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Posts: 231
Default

I'm in the same boat as you Dave - am looking for a sports shooting solution and I think I'm going to go A700 + Tamron f2.8 70-200 but I'll be shooting soccer outdoors yet still many gray overcast days here in our winter season.

One thought that crossed my mind is that you may be able to add an external flash to assist your shots. That could be a problem if you're shooting through the plexiglass or blinding the goalie - I suppose that is OK once or twice if it is the other teams' goalie. :? It may also be that some facilities won't allow use of a high power flash.

I've read in the past of a flash extender called the "Better Beamer". A lot of birders use it. Thought you might want to check it out.

By the way... I've been viewing YouTube videos on the f2.8 70-200 lens and that Sigma looks to be very very fast on the Nikon but not so fast on the Sony's. People have speculated that is because the tests were done with the lens cap on and the Sony's have an issue with the lack of light thereby slowing down the focus speed.

Is this what you see with your Sigma? (this test is with lens cap off)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr6lfvNNLNg&NR=1


NewsyL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2008, 1:00 PM   #20
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

NewsyL wrote:
Quote:
I'm in the same boat as you Dave - am looking for a sports shooting solution and I think I'm going to go A700 + Tamron f2.8 70-200 but I'll be shooting soccer outdoors yet still many gray overcast days here in our winter season.
Is it full-field soccer? If so, you're going to find 200mm is infuriatingly short. A 200mm lens gives you about 25 yards of coverage. On a full size field you can guess you'll miss most of the action with only 25 yards of coverage. If it's a smaller field for little kids not a big deal but for full field I would suggest a longer lens - even if you give up aperture to get it. I shoot a 300mm lens and it's really too short for soccer.
JohnG 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 9:43 PM.