IS and Sports question

[LJ2b2c]

I'm looking for a good lensfor a 50D (only havethe kit lens today the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6) to help with indoor Basketball pictures. I've been looking at the 85mm f1.8, the 100mm f2, and if I can find the money maybe even the 135mm f2. However none of these have IS such as the kit lens I'm used to. I've thought of getting a monopod to help, but my assumption has been that I will probably increasing my ISO to get higher shutter speeds, and therefore IS which helps with the camera motion will not be required??? Is it a fair assumption that above certain shutter speeds IS is not required?


(Sorry - it posted twice and I don't see how to delete??)

[Sean Setters]

It's true that you'll need higher ISOs to reach the shutter speeds necessary to minimize motion blur. Under those conditions, you probably wouldn't see a huge benefit from using a monopod. However, a monopod will help tremendously in those situations where the players are relatively still (during a timeout, or else waiting for the ball to be thrown in). When those situations arise, you can turn down the ISO as well as the shutter speed in order to get a better quality picture. However, in doing so, you'll need a steadier hand (or else a good support mechanism). That's when a monopod would certainly help.

[nrdavis]

I own the 85/1.8 which I've used on a 30D, 40D and my new 7D. This lens is definitely worth the relatively small amount of money it costs. Autofocus is quite fast, and manual focus is much smoother than the 50/1.4.


I've heard the 100/2 is basically the 85's twin, except for a bit more
focal length and 1/3 stop less light. If you want a longer lens on a
budget that's where I'd look.


I used to shoot a lot of basketball with a 70-200/2.8 on a Full Frame film camera. Because action in basketball is often so close a zoom lens can be nice, but any 70-200/2.8 is going to run you $700+, and won't allow as fast of shutter speeds.


The 136mm equivalent of the 85/1.8 on your 50D should be a really nice compromise of focal length. A longer lens (like the 135/2) might be better for shots of the players under the far basket, but by the time they're on your side of the court, you'll definitely want a shorter lens.


While an f/1.8 lens will help you autofocus faster, I'd be wary of shooting sports wide open at f/1.8. There's not a lot of depth of field down there, and wide open is where all but the most expensive lenses suffer in sharpness. My suggestion would be to shoot stopped down to f/2.2 or so, and use f/1.8 for extra brightness in the viewfinder and faster autofocus.

[Keith B]

IS is pretty cool when you are trying to capture motion though. Putting the lens into mode 2 and panning at slower shutter speeds makes for some very captivating pics. Probably not as much with basketball.

[Sean Setters]

IS is pretty cool when you are trying to capture motion though. Putting the lens into mode 2 and panning at slower shutter speeds makes for some very captivating pics. Probably not as much with basketball.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

That would be a cool effect if you had a couple of Canon 580EX flashes (set to rear-curtain sync) firing off-camera and triggered by Radiopopper PX units. That wayyou'd get the blur of motion leading into the subject exposed by the flash.

[LJ2b2c]

Yep, the flash config would be neat, until my son came home and kicked my a#@ for making him miss the shot! I do see some using flash at the games, but I know it does bother some (at least my son) so I try not to use flash.


Thanks for the input. So if I'm keeping my shutter speed at say 200+, do I need to worry as much about IS?

[Sean Setters]

The general rule is 1/(effective focal length). Let's say you're using a 100mm lens on a camera body with an APS-C (1.6x) sized sensor. You multiply the focal length by the sensor multiplier, giving you an effective focal length of 160mm. That would mean you typically need 1/160 second or faster shutter speed to prevent blur from camera movement.

[LJ2b2c]

I had seen that calculation before, but thought it was more for the motion of the subject, not the camera. Thanks.