Tele Zoom for Swim Meets

[Force]

I shot an indoor swim meet with my 60D and 18-135 lens. I got some really great shots from the stands, but I want to be able to zoom in and get faces. Can anybody recommend a good lens for that? Sigma, Tamron and Canons lenses sound fine to me. Budget is about 1500$. All of the indoor meets are in well lighted pools. Also, what do you recommend for filtering at a pool?

Thanks.

Force

[Tom]

Canon 100-400 will give you the most reach for the money.

[thumper]

Mark:

I used to shoot a lot of pool events with a 70-200mm f4/L with decent lighting. With dim lighting I used a 135L.

One thing you might find extremely useful is a GOOD circular polarizing filter. Just make sure, if on a zoom, the zoom has a NON-rotating front element. You may need to up your exposure one or two notches. (Why many prefer a 2.8 lens).

Have you thought about store/on-line rental of something in the 70-300mm range, like the new Tamron or Canon L? If you can live with f4-5.6 as max aperture, these give a good range and they are compact and relatively light weight.

Thomas is also right on with the 100-400, but, if hand holding, it can be tiresome and it is a "push-pull" design, rather than having a zoom ring.

T. Sandlin
Victoria, TX
Pro Media Images

[shnitz]

I used to shoot a fair amount at the UH natatorium. I felt that the lighting in there sucked. The workhorse 70-200 f/2.8 is a great lens. I used it on a 20D with great results. This is easily the go-to lens for sports photography. I wouldn't shoot under f/2.8 if the lighting is anywhere like what I used to deal with.

Your choice on whether to get IS or not. The Canon version spanks all of the 3rd party versions up and down the street. I didn't have the IS version. I felt that it was better for me to just put the lens on a monopod when shooting. It currently goes for $1,370 at Amazon. Free shipping, no tax. This is about the limit of telephoto large aperture lenses. The 135mm f/2 is $1,100. The 200mm f/2 is $5,000+, as is the 300mm f/2.8. If f/4 will work fine for you, you can consider the 300mm f/4, which is also just under $1,400.

A polarizer automatically reduces the light coming into your camera by 1/2. Using it on an f/2 lens would work, but on the 70-200 f/4, you now effectively are metering at f/5.6. Depending on how dark the venue is, this may not be realistic for someone with no fast glass.

[venchka]

Canon 200/1.8 and move around.