Which lens would you recommend for soccer?
Jul 5, 2021 16:08:14 #
Jul 5, 2021 16:44:02 #
Google Ken Rockwell and Thom hoag- don’t know how to spell his name. If you can handhold the 70-200 2.8 you will feel the weight on 200-500 and I miss the button what you can program. the 200-500 is a good lens, I don’t know the other one
Jul 5, 2021 17:18:28 #
philo wrote:
forget the lens and use a ball.........it is easier to kick.
Probably cheaper too. You won’t have to rent one.
Jul 5, 2021 18:37:55 #
Douglass
Loc: NJ
I sometimes switch to DX mode with my 70/210 lens for even more reach. It beats buying a new lens.
Jul 5, 2021 18:43:00 #
StLouie1970 wrote:
My daughter plays 11v11 soccer and I'll be traveli... (show quote)
I would suggest a TRIPOD for both #1 and #2
Jul 5, 2021 19:41:34 #
cascom
Loc: Redmond
Silverrails wrote:
I would suggest a TRIPOD for both #1 and #2
Tripods don't belong on a sports field. Use a monopod.
Jul 5, 2021 20:20:59 #
Jul 5, 2021 20:23:59 #
I have used the 200-500 and had full reach over the entire field but too long for close action at the scoring ends. Teams are on one dedicated side of field while parents/spectators are restricted to the other sideline. However, I have been able to shoot from one of the corners of the end field. I shoot from the end my granddaughter is trying to score and switch at halftime. I have found the 70-200 to be much better for the action at the scoring ends where I capture the faces during the action. Best wishes to you
Jul 5, 2021 20:24:11 #
I have used the 200-500 and had full reach over the entire field but too long for close action at the scoring ends. Teams are on one dedicated side of field while parents/spectators are restricted to the other sideline. However, I have been able to shoot from one of the corners of the end field. I shoot from the end my granddaughter is trying to score and switch at halftime. I have found the 70-200 to be much better for the action at the scoring ends where I capture the faces during the action. Best wishes to you
Jul 5, 2021 20:33:07 #
david vt
Loc: Vermont
Douglass wrote:
I sometimes switch to DX mode with my 70/210 lens for even more reach. It beats buying a new lens.
But isn’t this a false choice? In DX mode on a FX camera (or extended crop mode on my DX camera), is not the camera just using the center of the sensor, decreasing FOV/extending reach, by just throwing the outer pixels away. Would this not be just the same if you cropped in PP?
The only advantage I can see is that the file sizes would be smaller and write quicker to the card, which would clear the buffer faster
Is my understanding incorrect?
Jul 5, 2021 21:31:38 #
StLouie1970 wrote:
My daughter plays 11v11 soccer and I'll be traveli... (show quote)
Of those two the 200-500 is the better choice. You might also consider the Sigma sport 150-600. Coupled with your 70-200 it gives you a great deal of flexibility. Only problems with the lens is it is pretty heavy and it is a little bit slow, so not so good for evening or night games, but it's my go to lens for soccer, baseball and softball for the local paper. Can't afford a 600f4 so it's the next best choice.
Jul 5, 2021 22:46:03 #
nealbralley
Loc: Kansas
Recognizing that you own the 70-200 already; it is really all you'll need for shooting soccer. I shoot lacrosse games from time to time, and there is such a thing as too much lens. If you shoot from the side lines, you will do fine with the 70-200. I owned the Nikkor 200-500, and it is a nice lens for shooting birds and wildlife; it is sharp, but it will get heavy; it is a bit bulky, and it can be "overkill" on the soccer pitch! The really long lenses are fine if you shoot down the field from the end zone, but I am sticking with the 70-200. I often use that lens on a D500, so I am getting a bit more reach than you'd get with a full frame camera: 105-300 effectively. I have used the Nikkor 500mm PF, and it is great, but I think, again, it is too much lens for sideline shooting.
I can't speak to the 80-400 lens; I haven't ever used one.
I can't speak to the 80-400 lens; I haven't ever used one.
Jul 5, 2021 22:50:49 #
Douglass
Loc: NJ
Yes you’re right but since I don’t have a better lens I use this method to take pictures of kids sports and graduations. I would definitely want a 200-500mm if this becomes more than a hobby. Even though my 70-210 f/4 + camera is only around 3 lbs, it was tough holding steadily for long periods of time during graduation since I was taking pictures and videos.
Jul 6, 2021 01:25:25 #
baron_silverton
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
If you are shooting on a full frame camera and you want a little more reach move to DX crop mode and you will have 50% more reach without spending a dime :)
Just a thought - and the whole set up will also weigh exactly the same as what you are used to now.
If you are already shooting on a DX body, then I would be surprised that you need more reach as 200mm has the equivalent field of view of a 300mm which should be fairly sufficient to get most shots on the soccer field.
Good luck :)
Just a thought - and the whole set up will also weigh exactly the same as what you are used to now.
If you are already shooting on a DX body, then I would be surprised that you need more reach as 200mm has the equivalent field of view of a 300mm which should be fairly sufficient to get most shots on the soccer field.
Good luck :)
Jul 6, 2021 07:41:58 #
I would choose the 200-500. I put mine on a mono pod for this type of shooting.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.