Forums > Photography Talk > Sport shooting Lens ,Focus fast

Photographer

BlueWolf Photography

Posts: 108

Prescott Valley, Arizona, US

Hi thanks for reading, was looking at these two lens the Tamron70-200mm f/2.8 VC G2 and the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII.   I want to do fast action shots at low light and also in the daytime? I can not decide between the two, I wanted something that can focus really fast and catch up to the action. I know the Nikon has better build quality, but I can not decide which one, can anyone please help me out?   Thank you

Nov 17 17 04:30 am Link

Photographer

Black Z Eddie

Posts: 1903

San Jacinto, California, US

To be honest, IMO, for these types of questions, it's probably better to just Google it.  Reason being is one would have to have both to do an adequate and reasonable compare.

Tamron vs Nikon Video Search

Nov 18 17 10:26 am Link

Photographer

Keith Moody

Posts: 548

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Hmm, since I've shot college sports here in Phoenix for more than a decade, and since I have used both of those lenses for low light indoor sports, and since I do live in Phoenix, I figured I'd chime in.

You honestly can't go wrong with either of those lenses.  If you can afford the Nikon, I'd certainly go with the Nikon simply because it is a better-built item and will have a better resale value down the road.  But the Tamron G2 is no slouch.  Both worked well for me.  Honestly didn't notice a difference.  The only thing I didn't like about the Tamron is that the slick, smooth surface of the lens collected fingerprints like crazy.  I found myself frequently wiping off the lens with a towel.

I know this isn't very helpful.  If you can afford the Nikon, get the Nikon.  If you want to save money for more glass, get the Tamron.  Both lenses work fine in low light sports if you have a good fast focusing body.  Some bodies can actually slow down the focus speed in sports.

Good luck.

Nov 18 17 10:52 am Link

Photographer

Sichenze Photography

Posts: 357

Powhatan, Virginia, US

As stated your body will make a difference my d4 and D5 are faster then my d800 or d850. In the D5 d850 case they used the same focus engine but the bigger battery makes a difference.

Nov 26 17 02:19 am Link

Photographer

Thomas Van Dyke

Posts: 3233

Washington, District of Columbia, US

Sichenze Photography wrote:
As stated your body will make a difference my d4 and D5 are faster then my d800 or d850. In the D5 d850 case they used the same focus engine but the bigger battery makes a difference.

QFT...

btw, I shoot the AF-S 200-400mm f/4 IF ED VR Nikkor for sports and it virtually locks focus instantly... It is so much quicker than my AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 IF ED VR II that I never use the later for action sports any more...

Example of the 200-400mm f/4 on a Pro Body
http://www.restonstudio.com/image-viewe … allery80-5

It is oft said that it is the photographer not the kit that makes the difference
However in action sports that simply isn't a valid inference (at least in my humble estimation)

Hope this helps or is at least food for thought.
I wish you well on your journey BlueWolf

Nov 26 17 06:39 am Link

Photographer

Voy

Posts: 1594

Phoenix, Arizona, US

I shoot with the Nikon 70-200 VRII and I think it is super fast. I have been shooting sports for years in daylight and inside high school gyms. I think that the best way to test the speed of a lens is when shooting indoors and shooting a sport that is fast like basketball. In basketball you have players and referees that block your subject so it is very crucial to have a lens that can focus on the subject quickly. Here are some samples of my latest Bball game:


In this image, notice how the coach's head is in focus. The players were on the way and the coach was moving around so it was difficult to get a clear view of the coach. The Nikon 70-200 VRII was fast at finding the coach's face in a split of a second.

Nikon D700
Nikon 70-200 VRII F2.8
ISO 3200
F2.8
1/200

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4524/37946068164_e8053c9e3f_c.jpg

Another example:
This area had more light so I was able to shoot at 1/320 shutter speed keeping the rest of the settings the same.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4523/37946067054_7c0e591e58_c.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4537/24791424458_0dc94687e4_c.jpg

Nov 26 17 02:05 pm Link

Photographer

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 6597

Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US

Thomas Van Dyke wrote:

Not to offer unsolicited critique but that's a great shot!

Nov 27 17 05:47 am Link

Photographer

Thomas Van Dyke

Posts: 3233

Washington, District of Columbia, US

FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
...great shot!

Thanks! Albeit the equestrian deserves all credit here, her skill set is superb smile

Nov 27 17 06:40 am Link

Photographer

Yingwah Productions

Posts: 1557

New York, New York, US

Black Z Eddie wrote:
To be honest, IMO, for these types of questions, it's probably better to just Google it.  Reason being is one would have to have both to do an adequate and reasonable compare.

Tamron vs Nikon Video Search

The issue is that most reviews are rarely done by true sports photographers, their idea of "sports test" is usually a jogger running horizontal to them to test panning, then running towards them. Cameras from 2 decades ago with 7 focus points could easily nail those tests, making them almost meaningless. (Although from my testing the newest Canon's still have issues continuous tracking walking towards, it's baffling why they're top sports camera)

Nov 27 17 09:59 pm Link

Photographer

Keith Moody

Posts: 548

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Voy wrote:
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4537/24791424458_0dc94687e4_c.jpg

Nice shots.

Nov 27 17 10:06 pm Link