grberg

I shoot mostly grandkids sports with a d500 and an 18-300 3.5-5.6 Nikon lens. With good sunlight I can get some pretty sharp action pics (usually at f8 or so). However, in late afternoon light and under stadium lights using auto iso and f5.6 I get some acceptable but somewhat noisy pics. I’m considering investing in a 70-200 2.8 lens (probably the Tamron G2), but would like to know of anyone’s experience shooting action shots at f2.8 or f4. I’ve gotten pretty good at hitting my focus points using f5.6 to f8, but I wonder if I can at f2.8 or f4. Any advice would be appreciated.

jack schade Loc: La Pine Oregon

I shoot wit the Nikon 70-200. With the camera on continuous focus it focuses very fast. At f 2.8 it is spot on, but the depth of field is very shallow. Keep that in mind when shooting wide open. I believe that you would be very happy with a fast 70-200 lens.

Jack

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I got great results with my Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8. Now I'm using a Nikon 80-200mm, and the results are excellent. I also have a Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 - no complaints there.

Some 70-200mm comparisons -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAAeoB1F7nI
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/lens-roundup/best-70-200mm-tele-zoom-lenses-64789
https://petapixel.com/2015/03/28/just-the-lenses-the-great-200mm-shoot-out/
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=that+nikon+guy+70-200mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=946&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Tamron -
http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f2-8-di-vc-usd-g2
https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/photography-gear/lenses/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f2-8-g2-review/
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f-2-8-di-vc-usd-g2--a025--review-30649

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Just do it. Working with a 70-200 on a D500 is like working with a 135-300 on a full frame. There's a lot of magnification! You'll need a fast shutter speed for action, at least 1/320, even with VC on (which helps ONLY with camera shake, not subject motion blur).

f/2.8 can be the difference between manageable exposure and a missed opportunity, or between reducible noise and unacceptable quality loss. At f/5.6, on the 18-300, you need an ISO two stops faster, or a shutter speed two stops slower (longer).

The other reason to use a fixed aperture, 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom is optical performance. A "3X" zoom (24-70, 70-200) is usually MUCH sharper and performs better, overall, than a super-long-throw zoom. The 70-200 range is used by most professionals, often wide open, for shallow depth of field and subject isolation.

The 18-300 lenses are really made for travel use, outdoors, in bright light, where you can stop down to f/8 or f/11. Everything about them is a compromise to save space, save weight, travel light, and not have to change lenses. You sacrifice low light performance and optical excellence for practicality and weight savings.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

That combo will totally amaze you. The Tamron G2 focuses instantly and accurately every time and the D500's 153 focus points pretty much make it impossible to take an out of focus shot with it. I have a pro barrel racing photographer customer who uses that very combination alongside his D4s and Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 lens. He makes a VERY good living with them both. The D500/G2 combo is used the most because of its lightweight compared to the D4s/Sigma, but performs just as well except in very low light arenas where the D4s performs better at higher ISO's.
I own the Tamron G2 myself and also love its results on both my D500 and D850 bodies.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I use Canon gear, but it should be no different with Nikon stuff...

When I'm shooting out in good light, I often use several variable aperture, lighter, smaller zooms like a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6. More often than not, I'll set those to apertures f/5.6, f/6.3 f/7.1, or f/8. This gives some additional "latitude" for minor focus errors.

28-135mm at f/7.1...


100-400mm at f/6.3...


But in lower light conditions, early or late in the day or covered/shaded arenas, or "under the lights", I don't use those lenses. I switch to f/4, f/2.8 or faster lenses. Using DSLRs with an optical viewfinder, these help with a brighter viewfinder, too. I'll still stop down to f/4 when possible, for a bit more depth of field and "forgiveness" with focus accuracy, but can use them wide open if need be.

It depends upon the distance to the subject, too. Up close, focus accuracy becomes more critical and depth of field may be problematic. But at some distance, it may be no problem to use f/2.8 or larger. (I'll also sometimes use larger aperture lenses even in bright light, to more strongly blur down and "obliterate" backgrounds.)

For example, 300mm f/2.8 lens almost wide open at f/3.5, but at some distance...


Versus much closer with the the same 300mm stopped down to f/5.6...


In the first shot above, from greater distance, the entire horse and rider are in sharp focus. But in the second shot, much closer, even a stopping down to a smaller aperture wasn't enough to keep both in focus (horse's face is sharp, but the rider's is not).

Much of the time I use a single AF point... that helps insure accurate focus. It's more work for me, keeping that AF point right where I want camera and lens to focus, but it makes for a high percentage of accurately focused shots... leaves less up to chance the way that using multiple AF points does. I also use back button focusing, which puts me in more full control of when the AF system runs (and when it doesn't).

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

An excellent lens choice, not only for low light sports, but many other uses as well (one of my most used lenses), but be aware that it’s not a lightweight (3.31 lbs).

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Oh absolutely, the Tamron 70-200 G2 was one of my best purchases.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

The shooting aperture is NOT the same as the focusing aperture. So all things considered, using an F2.8 lens will allow more light for the camera to focus with, so you should get better focus accuracy. However, depth of field is diminished, so you will need to focus selectively so that the important stuff is in focus, even if the rest is a little soft.

alolewis

I use a TAMRON 70-200 2.8 lens for sports photography, mostly college Soccer, Basketball, swimming and water polo. (community college) Depth of field is not an issue usually as distance also affects DOF, usually the distance is far enough that you still have a decent DOF. Plus sometimes if t is good to have the subject in focus and the other players out of focus. I usually use single point focus, have tried other focus modes and always return to single point. The biggest issue I have in sports photography is you are so intent of following the action and taking photos that you miss the game or action taking place out of the camera view.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

The 70-200 f2.8 is usaually my go to lens for indoor sports like HS wrestling. I usually shoot either wide open or f3.5, and with good AF and tracking, I don’t find DOF to be a problem, but it does get a little heavy after holding it a eye level for a couple of hours (the 5D3 + grip + lens is close to 6lbs.), so recently I’ve been shooting those matches with a 135 f2L + a 1.4 matched extender which doesn’t have the versatility, but half the weight.

Shutterbug57

I have a Nikkor 80-200/2.8 that I have had for years. I shot soccer under HS lights and also used it for court sports in less than well lit HS gyms. I got good results with a D200. Your D500 should be a breeze with the 70-200/2.8

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

70-200 f/2.8 is the go to lens for many, pros and not pros. They are not inexpensive but worth it if you can spend the money. Play with a decent DOF app for your phone to understand how the DOF changes at different apertures, focal lengths and distance to subjects.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

If it is within your budget the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 FL is one of the best lenses on the market, in my opinion. The D500 is one of the really good cameras. I would be interested in knowing your settings for low light because I often shoot at f/5.6 with all my lenses. The D500 is really good with a higher ISO setting when you need more light by a couple or three stops. I would suggest trying to shoot with auto ISO and Aperture Priority at f/5.6 and se your results. I would also suggest that you look into shooting RAW because you can recover light fairly easily. I suspect technique might help more than a new and faster lens. Good luck.

Leitz Loc: Solms

The OP beat you to it - "However, in late afternoon light and under stadium lights using auto iso and f5.6 I get some acceptable but somewhat noisy pics."