50-100mm 2.8 lens Possible? I am wondering what the odds are that someone will make a lens that is suitable for inside sports. I have a canon 70-200 2.8 lens but that things is big. I...

olcoach Loc: Oregon

I am wondering what the odds are that someone will make a lens that is suitable for inside sports. I have a canon 70-200 2.8 lens but that things is big. I am wondering if it is possible to make a lens of 50-100 that would be smaller and easier to hand-hold than the big lenses out there right now. Is it even possible to build lens like this. Just one of my wishes.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

If you can't find a zoom to your liking, get a nice/fast prime in that range, don't wait forever for someone to build a lens that lives just in your head.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

The Sigma 50-150 2.8 is a great lens for an APS--C sensor camera.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

olcoach wrote:

I am wondering what the odds are that someone will make a lens that is suitable for inside sports. I have a canon 70-200 2.8 lens but that things is big. I am wondering if it is possible to make a lens of 50-100 that would be smaller and easier to hand-hold than the big lenses out there right now. Is it even possible to build lens like this. Just one of my wishes.

Panasonic 35-100mm f2.8...but you'd have to switch systems...or the 75mm 1.8

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

I bought an 85mm which is usually considered to be a portrait lens. I use it on a Nikon d7000 that has a cropped sensor, so it is like a 135mm. Works great for basketball. Best thing is that it is fast. f/1.8 I like it.

amehta Loc: Boston

ebrunner wrote:

I bought an 85mm which is usually considered to be a portrait lens. I use it on a Nikon d7000 that has a cropped sensor, so it is like a 135mm. Works great for basketball. Best thing is that it is fast. f/1.8 I like it.

Yes, the 85mm is a great indoor sports lens.

amehta Loc: Boston

olcoach wrote:

I am wondering what the odds are that someone will make a lens that is suitable for inside sports. I have a canon 70-200 2.8 lens but that things is big. I am wondering if it is possible to make a lens of 50-100 that would be smaller and easier to hand-hold than the big lenses out there right now. Is it even possible to build lens like this. Just one of my wishes.

It's certainly possible. Sigma just came out with the 18-35mm f/1.8. But with fairly cheap f/1.8 primes available at both 50mm and 85mm, this may be a niche, and it would be a business decision to not make it, not technical.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

GoofyNewfie wrote:

The Sigma 50-150 2.8 is a great lens for an APS--C sensor camera.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

amehta Loc: Boston

GoofyNewfie wrote:

The Sigma 50-150 2.8 is a great lens for an APS--C sensor camera.

True, but the OP wanted something "that would be smaller and easier to hand-hold than the big lenses."

Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8: 3.4 x 7.8", 2.95 lb ($950)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8: 3.4 x 7.8", 3.15 lb ($1250)

Assuming the specs from the B&H web site are correct, the only real savings is in cost.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

amehta wrote:

True, but the OP wanted something "that would be smaller and easier to hand-hold than the big lenses."

Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8: 3.4 x 7.8", 2.95 lb ($950)
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8: 3.4 x 7.8", 3.15 lb ($1250)

Assuming the specs from the B&H web site are correct, the only real savings is in cost.

I have the older version.... Forgot it had been updated. Mine is much smaller/lighter.

olcoach Loc: Oregon

Thanks to all of you. I have the Canon 70-200 2.8 which is as good as the Sig and they are both big. I guess I'm going to try a prime and see how it works. Thanks again for all of your suggestions. Mike

ole sarg Loc: south florida

Canon makes a 28-105 which would serve the purpose you have outlined.

amehta Loc: Boston

ole sarg wrote:

Canon makes a 28-105 which would serve the purpose you have outlined.

Do you mean the 24-105mm f/4L? I mostly agree, except for indoor sports, every stop matters.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

amehta wrote:

Do you mean the 24-105mm f/4L? I mostly agree, except for indoor sports, every stop matters.

He probably does mean the 28-105mm Canon, but it has been discontinued now.

amehta Loc: Boston

MT Shooter wrote:

He probably does mean the 28-105mm Canon, but it has been discontinued now.

That would explain why I didn't find it on the B&H site.

The 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 is also, on average, 1 stop slower than the 70-200mm f/2.8.