Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

3 end

Archive 2022 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

adamx12m
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JRobertson wrote:
Depends, are you shooting football during the daylight? If so, then I'd go RF 100-500. If you're in any kind of transition or low light/field lighting, you'll need an f/2.8 without question. To correct an earlier comment, the 300 f/2.8 is absolutely NOT the best lens for football. Not nearly enough length, and you'll be cropping/damaging the images constantly. That said, you could probably secure a 400 f/2.8 v1 for $3500ish, if you can extend your budget slightly.

Not much daylight HS football occurs unless it's 7 on 7 during summer. F2.8 lens is a minimum, whether it's 70-200, 300, 400 all can make great shots but it's about position on the field. Obviously at 200mm isn't going to work from the endzone shooting when the ball is at the 50, however from the 20 is a different story. With a single body + 400 from the endzone when the ball is on the 20 or closer won't work well. Team knowledge is also helpful, some teams are rush heavy, others pass so position + focal length factors in especially if you just have one body.

R5 crop is understated here so for the most part IMO a decent image output is 3000px wide. If you wanted just a little bit of extra focal length add a 1.4tc to the 70-200, even at f4 night football can be done and cleaned up with Pureraw.

Sep 06, 2022 at 11:14 AM

gwaww
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

I’ll second using crop mode on the r5. I do it frequently.

Sep 06, 2022 at 11:24 AM

JimmyJames
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

You generally will have good access along the sidelines and endzones of most HS football games. This will allow you to be a bit closer to the action and allow you to travel up and down the field with the ball as needed.

I'd get a 70-200 and use the crop mode of the R5 when needed. The 70-200 will be very useful for everything including indoor sports.

Of course, you do give up the potential big plays. I've been near the line of scrimmage when a play breaks 70 yards and I could do was watch it run away from me for a TD.

Sep 06, 2022 at 11:48 AM

Mike Jacks0n
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

Llewtwo wrote:
I don't know if Sigma or Tamron will make any RF mount lenses but they have a very nice lineup of lenses that pair well with RF bodies via the adapter. The Tamron 35 1.4 is one of the best 35 mm lenses and if you consider the price it's a great addition to the bag. The Sigma Art series all mate nicely with the R series with the adapter and their 135 to me is superior to the Canon version. The Sigma 120-300 sport is a good value purchased used and offers a sports shooter a lot of lens...Show more →

Sigma makes great lenses, but that's not what's in question here. However, after doing a little more research, it seems as though the big problem with the recent push to curb 3rd parties, is the patent rights. The EF patent rights are likely long gone so they don't have much of a legal stance to stop 3rd parties. On the RF, the patent is much more recent so patent law stands firms (at least for another 10 years or so). So it is very unlikely Canon will be able to escalate the EF fight, however, updates on a EF lens mount for a lens that is 10 years old is also likely not going to happen (and if it does, it will likely not continue at the pace of firmware updates for new R bodies). So there are still threats to the option, and I still stand behind the idea of not entering in to that position.

As far as the OP's original question, I liked shooting high school football with a 300mm 2.8, but tried a 400 mm and it was better. If you can't find a 400mm in the price range, you have the 300mm to fall back on and it isn't terrible, just has a smaller sweet spot (you'll need to keep your thinking cap on and anticipate the action).

Sep 06, 2022 at 12:10 PM

JRobertson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

adamx12m wrote:
Not much daylight HS football occurs unless it's 7 on 7 during summer. F2.8 lens is a minimum, whether it's 70-200, 300, 400 all can make great shots but it's about position on the field. Obviously at 200mm isn't going to work from the endzone shooting when the ball is at the 50, however from the 20 is a different story. With a single body + 400 from the endzone when the ball is on the 20 or closer won't work well. Team knowledge is also helpful, some teams are rush heavy, others pass so position + focal length factors...Show more →

That's not really accurate, currently. In MI current HS football games have ample daylight for 3/4 of the game at this time of year. In FL, I'm getting close to 50% of the game in daylight. It's absolutely possible. Now, when the time changes and is rolled back, totally agree...but right now there's ample light.

Sep 06, 2022 at 12:33 PM

adamx12m
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JRobertson wrote:
That's not really accurate, currently. In MI current HS football games have ample daylight for 3/4 of the game at this time of year. In FL, I'm getting close to 50% of the game in daylight. It's absolutely possible. Now, when the time changes and is rolled back, totally agree...but right now there's ample light.

Every field is a bit different where the stands may block that late daylight. By October or so that first half daylight is gone. I think it's good point about location but it's still relevant to have the right lens for the entire game.

Sep 06, 2022 at 01:27 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JimmyJames wrote:
You generally will have good access along the sidelines and endzones of most HS football games. This will allow you to be a bit closer to the action and allow you to travel up and down the field with the ball as needed.

I'd get a 70-200 and use the crop mode of the R5 when needed. The 70-200 will be very useful for everything including indoor sports.

Of course, you do give up the potential big plays. I've been near the line of scrimmage when a play breaks 70 yards and I could do was watch it run away from...Show more →

It has happened to anyone covering football.

It's a reason I like to park in the end zone and have the action coming at me. But, if trying to cover both offenses, means quite some running back and forth.

It's easier though when covering one team - you get both their offense and defense. Loved the long shots with a 600 but the 200-400 is way more flexible. But that position gives up opportunities better captured along the sidelines and you tend to get cross traffic blocking your intended subject a fair amount. But when a player breaks free, it can be really great, so long as they're coming towards my corner.

If you only have a shorter lens, then you'll be covering action that makes sense with that lens. It won't be things far away. But you should still be able to get something.

OP said this was for fun, so it's not like he has a deadline to meet, an editor to please, etc.

Sep 06, 2022 at 10:29 PM

leewoolery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

Have fun and use the gear you have before investing in long telephotos.

If you decide you want to try and make some money at high school football action photography, then look into longer reach options down the road.

You won't know if this is a venture you want to take to the next level until you photograph a game, download images, edit them, display them, get feedback and see if there is a reason to market for your services.

Hauling a 400 f/2.8 along the sidelines for 2 1/2 hours every Friday night for 12 weeks is not for everybody.

I see yearbook photographers, parents with cameras and some media professionals patrolling the sidelines every Friday night using a 70-200 and they are perfectly happy with the results.

They just wait for the close action before they press the shutter.

Make it an enjoyable experience.

Sep 07, 2022 at 08:09 AM

Yaryman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

Reading all these responses about maybe using a 400mm f2.8 to shoot high school football for fun ( OP's words ), it makes me wonder how I shot Tri-X pushed to 1600 using
a Vivitar 285 flash on a Nikon FM camera at 1/30 at f/4.0 using a 70-200 for a Newspaper back when Dinosaurs roamed the planet.

Didn't realize Canon had RF teleconverters yet. They do.
A 1.4 converter on the OP's 70-200 shooting on a R5 will give plenty of reach with plenty of crop.
So there is the $500 solution.

Sep 08, 2022 at 08:25 AM

Mike Jacks0n
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

Yaryman wrote:
Reading all these responses about maybe using a 400mm f2.8 to shoot high school football for fun ( OP's words ), it makes me wonder how I shot Tri-X pushed to 1600 using
a Vivitar 285 flash on a Nikon FM camera at 1/30 at f/4.0 using a 70-200 for a Newspaper back when Dinosaurs roamed the planet.

Didn't realize Canon had RF teleconverters yet. They do.
A 1.4 converter on the OP's 70-200 shooting on a R5 will give plenty of reach with plenty of crop.
So there is the $500 solution.

Can't use either TC on either of the RF 70-200's. Physical limitation. But as Yaryman alluded to, a 70-200 is still a very good H.S. football lens. I would still mostly depend on that setup if I wanted to shoot a game now.

Sep 08, 2022 at 03:15 PM

Al Goldis
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JRobertson wrote:
That's not really accurate, currently. In MI current HS football games have ample daylight for 3/4 of the game at this time of year. In FL, I'm getting close to 50% of the game in daylight. It's absolutely possible. Now, when the time changes and is rolled back, totally agree...but right now there's ample light.

Ah, the joys of late August/early September football. Of course, by the time playoffs start, it is pitch black at kickoff.

Sep 08, 2022 at 03:39 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

ShootPDX wrote:
Hi Canon Fans,

I’d like to take a stab at HS football and while I have the RF 70-200 2.8, is like something with a little more reach. The RF 400 2.8 is out of the question. Is there a decent adaptable equivalent for around $2-3k?

300 2.8 isn't too expensive anymore I've seen under $2k even for IS v1. IS probably unnecessary on football if you see a non IS version. Older 300 2.8s really pretty close to newer for weight however older 400 2.8 can be huge. So keep that in mind.

Canon hasn't made anything obsolete on a body i.e. if it works on the R5 it should continue to work. Probably on the R6 and R3 too so it seems pretty advanced. I doubt they'd obsolete lenses now .

Sep 08, 2022 at 11:13 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

300 f/4's might not be bad. Inexpensive and light

Sep 08, 2022 at 11:45 PM

timgangloff
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JRobertson wrote:
Depends, are you shooting football during the daylight? If so, then I'd go RF 100-500. If you're in any kind of transition or low light/field lighting, you'll need an f/2.8 without question. To correct an earlier comment, the 300 f/2.8 is absolutely NOT the best lens for football. Not nearly enough length, and you'll be cropping/damaging the images constantly. That said, you could probably secure a 400 f/2.8 v1 for $3500ish, if you can extend your budget slightly.

I disagree. I think the 300 2.8 is the best HS football lens. It's not the best college or pro lens, but for HS where you can largely follow the action up and down the field, the 300 is marvelous. It's lightweight and very hand holdable all game long. I use my 400 on a monopod, but if could manage, I'd shoot it all game without. Monopods are limiting, no matter how good you are with them. However, I'd also suggest you not buy the v1 400 2.8 IS lens. It's very heavy and probably nearing the end of it's service life and you could very well end up with an expensive brick.

My favorite HS lens would be the 120-300 2.8. I've moved to Sony, so not sure what is available for the latest Canon mirrorless ones, but I believe the newer Sigmas will work. And you may be able to find one used in your price range. I think my buddy who shoots a lot of sports for USAToday uses a 120-300 for much of his work on the Canon r5 and r6.

I'd never buy something less than a 2.8 for HS games. Yes, you may get parts or most of the early games with good light, but sooner or later you'll be shooting in the dark and your f4+ lenses will be almost unusable from a focusing and noise respect.

Sep 12, 2022 at 10:02 AM

JRobertson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

timgangloff wrote:
I disagree. I think the 300 2.8 is the best HS football lens. It's not the best college or pro lens, but for HS where you can largely follow the action up and down the field, the 300 is marvelous. It's lightweight and very hand holdable all game long. I use my 400 on a monopod, but if could manage, I'd shoot it all game without. Monopods are limiting, no matter how good you are with them. However, I'd also suggest you not buy the v1 400 2.8 IS lens. It's very heavy and probably nearing the end of it's...Show more →

If you're cropping and don't shoot tight, and don't mind degrading image quality to do so, I'd agree with you.

Sep 12, 2022 at 11:01 AM

timgangloff
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

JRobertson wrote:
If you're cropping and don't shoot tight, and don't mind degrading image quality to do so, I'd agree with you.

I think maybe you've misread the OP post. He's shooting for fun. He doesn't need to shoot every play. If he follows the action, shoots his side of the field, he'll definitely be able to fill the frame with a 300. I did it for years, and if Sony had a 120-300 or a 300, I'd be tempted to use it for HS football where most of the time I'm shooting one body/lens. With an r5 or my A1, there are plenty of pixels to throw away and still have many many more than my wire service needs or wants. Since he's doing this for fun, a 300 makes a lot more sense than a 400. Especially concerning his budget and my suggestion to not buy a 400 that Canon no longer services. You do realize that while it's a fine lens, it was first released in 1999....

Sep 12, 2022 at 11:29 AM

Robin Smith
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

I agree with the above. If you are doing it for fun a 70-200mm with and without a TC will work too. You just can't get every shot in all parts of the field, so what? There will be other games. A 300mm f2.8 would be great (but you'd probably still need something shorter too).

Sep 12, 2022 at 02:59 PM

Al Goldis
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

timgangloff wrote:
I disagree. I think the 300 2.8 is the best HS football lens. It's not the best college or pro lens, but for HS where you can largely follow the action up and down the field, the 300 is marvelous. It's lightweight and very hand holdable all game long. I use my 400 on a monopod, but if could manage, I'd shoot it all game without. Monopods are limiting, no matter how good you are with them. However, I'd also suggest you not buy the v1 400 2.8 IS lens. It's very heavy and probably nearing the end of it's...Show more →

I'm in agreement. With HS football, you're able stay much closer to the action than in college or pro football, so a 300mm works well.

I will add one correction on the 400 2.8 IS version 1 you mentioned: it is long past its service life, at least according to Canon.

Sep 12, 2022 at 03:24 PM

jwolfe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

For HS football, I would recommend a 300mm 2.8 IS or IS ii. You can add the 1.4x if you feel you need it but round here the fields are so dark you need 2.8 unless you want crazy ISOs. Like others have said, you can get close to the action in HS. There's no need for a 400 or 600.

Sep 13, 2022 at 10:58 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Sports photography on a budget — outdoor HS football using R5

I think any fast 300's or 400's in this price range are out of service. Unless the Sigma still services 120-300, but even that is kinda doubtful. But if f/4 is fast enough using high ISO, the 300/4's are a lot lighter and not necessarily much more than a repair if it breaks. Probably pretty fun to go to the game anyway and you could look at the light levels while you're there

But I've still been thinking about 300/2.8 again lately after looking after some of the threads on here. Used to want one and Sub $2k IS looks pretty good.

Sep 13, 2022 at 11:08 AM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.