| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/25/2006 10:37:15 AM · #1 |
It looks like I'll be shooting some cricket this summer and I'm thinking that I'm going to need something longer than 200mm.
At the moment I'm thinking about the Sigma 170-500 or the Tamron 200-500, I know that these are not the greatest lenses for sport but due to the budget I'm left with little choice. I'll be shooting on a monopod in good sunlight.
Autofocus speed worries me with the cheaper long zooms.
Does anyone have any experience of these lenses - or could recommend an alternative?
Is there much difference in real terms between a 400 and a 500mm?
Can anyone recommend how to make my already less-than-impressed wife happy with another lens purchase?
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 11:05:27 AM · #2 |
I'm pretty damned happy with my Sigma 170-500.
Its not the worlds sharpest but on a nice clear days its pretty good, should be OK for cricket, I've been using it for surfing and sometimes theres an issue tracking far off people but with cricket you're likely to be doing less tracking |
|
|
|
05/25/2006 11:06:03 AM · #3 |
| in fact the issues I've had with tracking are down to me and my choise of camera settigns, not the lens |
|
|
|
05/25/2006 12:23:39 PM · #4 |
When I first started shooting sports I used the Tamron 200-500. I thought it was ok. But as I have continued trying to get better at shooting sports action outdoors I have come to think of my Tammy as too slow in focusing speed and not wide enough in maximum aperture. I still use it for wildlife but have switched to a 300mm f4 as my main outside action lens. I picked up a used 300 on ebay for less than I paid for the Tamron new. I'm not a Nikonite, and don't know enough about cricket to know the distances involved, so this may not apply to what you are planning on shooting. I have traded the longer focal length for wider aperture, which helps me to better isolate my subjects from backgrounds, to use faster shutter speeds to freeze movement better, and to keep on shooting as it gets darker late in the day. Next time I hit the lottery, I think I'll go for the Sigma 120-300 f2.8, or a 400mm prime.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2006 12:57:59 PM · #5 |
Have you considered a 2x teleconverter? Not ideal, I know, but will most likely focus faster coupled with your 70-200 than either of the other two lenses you mentioned and is at least as fast, aperture-wise, over most of the range.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/01/2026 03:26:45 PM EST.
