Looking for a good lens?

Question

I have a Nikon D70 camera and I'm looking for a good lens so I can shoot sports, like football and basketball pictures. I need something that lets more light in I guess. The lens that I have now is a 28mm-300mm. Maybe someone can suggest something here for me. Thanks.

Berta

Answer 1

I trust you've already cranked the ISO up as far as you dare (on my D200, ISO 1200 is about the maximum usable), and that you're already shooting in aperture priority mode with the lens wide open (lowest possible aperture number). If, despite those measures, you're getting sloooow shutter times, you're absolutely right: you need a faster lens.
I looked up the Sigma 28-300mm and the Tamron 28-300mm, and they're both f/3.5-6.3. (Versatile, but not so hot in low light situations.)
If you're prepared to sacrifice *a lot* of range, you can get a used Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8. Assuming that your current lens does f/5.6 at 200mm, the difference would be 2 stops. This means that the 80-200mm would reduce your shutter time to just 25% of what it is now.
You could add a tele-converter to the 80-200mm to keep your 300mm range, but this would add to the price, and by stacking lenses you'd only reduce the shutter time to 50%.
The 80-200mm lens is an old work horse in the Nikon professional line-up. You can find early models for as little as $500. Later models (with a twist ring vs. a push-pull ring for the zoom) cost more. They are all good however, and they all have auto-focus.
For basketball, you could even get medieval with your lens selection and use a 50mm f/1.4 with auto-focus (used for under $200). At 50mm, your current lens probably does f/4, so this would make 3 stops difference: you'd cut the shutter time down to just 12% of what it is now! Set your current lens to 50mm and folllow the action for a few minutes to see if that focal length works for you.
Other f/2.8 zoom lenses, and fast tele-lenses bigger than 200mm all cost a fortune. See if these options will do the trick first.

Answer 2

What don't you like about your current lens?

When you mention light, you probably want a lower aperature lens. If you want 200mm - 400mm for sports with a low aperature, be prepared to spend a lot of money ($1500 and up). Those lenses are also heavy 5 - 12 pounds.

Before you put down that kind of money, invest in a hot-shoe flash - biggest one they sell. That will set you back $500 or so.
Give that a whirl and see if you're getting enough light. Get as close as you can (at night) to the action. Just because the zoom will show doesn't mean the flash will reach that far.

As a trial, put camera in "Aperature Priority" mode and take a few pics (use a monopod or tripod to stabilize).


Happy snapping.

Answer 3

actually the 28-300mm (is kinda too long to be true, is it nikkor lens?) is enough to take sports photography. increase your ISO and you should be able to get more speed without having to compensate for lenses with bigger aperture. unless you are willing to spend thousands of dollars to get large lenses. if you do, i'd recommend VR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED from nikon or VR200-400mm f/4G IF-ED from nikon too.

Answer 4

do some reading at www.fredmiranda.com

there is a Nikon forum and lots of lens reviews to read.