# do you like shooting a prime for sports?



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

Hi folks,

I'm shooting a Pentax and I don't have a fast enough lens to capture the light. My zooms are F5.6 etc...

So I"m looking at a sigma 70-200 f2.8 vs the Pentax DA* 200 which is a prime so no zoomy zoom zoom.

BUT, you can apparently focus on subjects within 3 ft so I'm just wondering if any of you out there, no matter the camera brand, shoot a prime for sports. I'm not sure how easy or hard it would be to frame or if framing would matter.

Maybe it would cause me to get into a better position?

I'm also thinking the prime would be better for IQ...seems to be the case with the reviews.

Thanks,
Keebler


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Unless you're into professional sport photography I would think you'd get more milage out of the Sigma. I own that lens and it's very good on IQ and on my Nikon D700/D300 the auto focus is fast.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

As with most things photography, it depends...

We shoot/have shot basketball, volleyball, baseball, curling, lacrosse, soccer, hockey, dragon boats, dance, motocross and probably a few others. Our go to lens is a 70-200/2.8. It will cover the vast majority of the above scenarios. I'd estimate over 90% of the time.

The only time we'll go wider is when we're sitting right under the basket in basketball or right beside the net in volleyball. Then we'll go 24-70/2.8. Estimate about 5% of the time.

The zooms work best simply for their versatility, the ability to cover more than a single focal length.

That said, we have used a 300/2.8 for the outfield in baseball, soccer, dragon boats, rarely from the opposite end of a hockey arena (same with curling), and sometimes motocross. This covers the last few % of shots we take in sports and is the only prime we use there.

As to image quality, I have no experience with the lenses you mentioned but the both the zooms we use (Canon) are superb. Third hand, I've heard the Sigma 70-200/2.8 is good glass.

You will need glass at least f/2.8 along with the ability of the camera to give decent images at ISO 4000, although your range w/ f/2.8 will usually be ISO 2000-3200 (assuming a SS of 1/500, which will freeze most action).


----------



## Kami (Jul 29, 2002)

The answer to your question depends on the sport that you are shooting and the location from which you are shooting.

For example, shooting soccer with the DA*200 may be too short for the middle of the field and if the action gets too close to your location then you are going to end up missing the ball from the photo, etc. At least with the zoom you would be able to zoom out to get the closer action. 

A zoom would give you more flexibility but at the cost of greater weight and potentially slower autofocus speed (depends on the model and make)

I'm shooting all zooms now as I'm willing to accept the greater weight for greater flexibility.

I would, on the other hand, love to own a 300 f2.8


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

Thanks for the feedback folks.

I would love a 300 2.8 as well, but expensive lol

I do love to zoom in and try to frame a shot before it happens.

Will keep you posted.

Thanks,
Keebler


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

At work we have to use primes because we need f2.8 lenses because you need the fast shutter speeds to freeze the action. I shoot no slower than 1/500 sec or faster when I can. I like shooting with a 400 f2.8 (pool lens) for hockey. Shooting in the Dome for football I used to like setting up in the endzone with a 400 and shoot up into the action coming towards me. You are screwed if there is a turnover though. We all have 300 f2.8's in our working kits but that is a bit short for the ACC and Dome. 

At the ACC and at the Gardens we shot from a platform up in the stands or at one of the photo spots along the boards. 

Shooting Baseball at the Dome there are two photo pits beside the dugouts for the teams so it's a two camera shoot, one with the 400mm and the other with a 70-210 f2.8. I've also shot from the catwalk above home plate which is an amazing angle but a major PITA to try and get clearance to shoot from since they are paranoid of you dropping something from up there which is not good. A monopod is your friend.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

Well folks - I bit the bullet and bought the sigma 70-200. I guess it's expected, but I can't believe how fast this thing focus'. Very nice. 

Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## Niteshooter (Aug 8, 2008)

Bernie Weil just sent me this on Facebook, he's shooting a lot of video at work. Looks rather heavy....


----------



## greenyoga (Nov 29, 2012)

Huge machine,but very cool.


----------



## forbidden_hero (May 21, 2005)

Niteshooter said:


> Bernie Weil just sent me this on Facebook, he's shooting a lot of video at work. Looks rather heavy....


Wow.. huge set up. Will that mic even pick up what he's shooting far far away? :lmao:


----------

