Motorsports Photography Equipment Questions
Jun 5, 2014 00:58:31 #
Tom S. wrote:
So often, it's not what you've got but how you use it that makes all the difference. Nice shots.
You are right Tom
Jun 5, 2014 13:01:52 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
jesseleduc wrote:
Depends on what you shoot but MMA you get pretty close to the action son a 85 can be good when they are on the far side of the ring.
Personally closer i get the better the shots
Personally closer i get the better the shots
For the MMA, I was originally considering my Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 mounted to a crop sensor 40D, and a 70-200 f/4 on my 5D for shots across the cage. Now I am considering the 85 to replace the 70-200 mainly for lower light. Won't know what the lighting looks like until fight night.
Other option is the 50 1.8 on the crop sensor which gets me pretty close to the 85, but in either case, I think better to shoot both at 2.8 unless lighting is worse than expected.
Pretty sure if lighting is super bad, my downfall will be ISO capability of both cameras. I do have a Rokinon 85 1.4 but as you know it is manual focus, but could be an option as I have read different views about using AF vs. manual for MMA. Never shot MMA before, but it is sure to be interesting. If it sounds like I am floundering, it is only because I am. LOL
Jun 5, 2014 13:25:14 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
sirlensalot wrote:
For the MMA, I was originally considering my Sigma... (show quote)
I think the 85mm is a good option over the 70-200mm f/4. Two stops of light is pretty significant with indoor sports, and the shallow depth of field can be nice.
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Jun 5, 2014 13:51:06 #
sirlensalot wrote:
I do have a Rokinon 85 1.4 but as you know it is manual focus, but could be an option as I have read different views about using AF vs. manual for MMA.
I do have a Rokinon 85 1.4 but as you know it is manual focus, but could be an option as I have read different views about using AF vs. manual for MMA.
Sir, my opinion and my experience, is that you'd be hard preset to get a decent shot of any random action sport on manual focus.
If you are close enough to use an 85 on 1.4, your DoF will be so thin, you would be just lucky to get a shot, if the shots are tight. If you are far away, it could be different, or if you wait for a stationary moment. Unlike baseball, or motor-sports, where the action is VERY easy to predict.
Just my opinion. Good luck. ;-)
SS
Jun 5, 2014 16:39:45 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
SharpShooter wrote:
Sir, my opinion and my experience, is that you'd be hard preset to get a decent shot of any random action sport on manual focus.
If you are close enough to use an 85 on 1.4, your DoF will be so thin, you would be just lucky to get a shot, if the shots are tight. If you are far away, it could be different, or if you wait for a stationary moment. Unlike baseball, or motor-sports, where the action is VERY easy to predict.
Just my opinion. Good luck. ;-)
SS
If you are close enough to use an 85 on 1.4, your DoF will be so thin, you would be just lucky to get a shot, if the shots are tight. If you are far away, it could be different, or if you wait for a stationary moment. Unlike baseball, or motor-sports, where the action is VERY easy to predict.
Just my opinion. Good luck. ;-)
SS
Appreciate the responses. You have convinced me to leave the manual focus 85 at home. Thank you.
Jun 5, 2014 16:41:00 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
amehta wrote:
I think the 85mm is a good option over the 70-200mm f/4. Two stops of light is pretty significant with indoor sports, and the shallow depth of field can be nice.
Understood. More to think about. Thank you.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Advice from the Pros section of our forum.