Best Lens for Sports Photography

nnowak wrote:

JNR wrote:

Anything other than a zoom will be a huge compromise. (I'm primarily a prime shooter, so don't bother to flame me about this suggestion). You already have the best AF-C body ever made, so the choices of zoom lenses that will track well are fairly broad. If you aren't already experienced with shooting heavy lenses extensively (such as the 50-140), then you don't really have enough time to learn how to do so proficiently. I think your best bet is the 70-300, or possibly the 55-200 if you don't expect to be doing much longer shooting (football and soccer especially require longer focal lengths). Down the line, the 50-140 would be best for basketball in a close H.S. environment, but you would want far more time to learn how to properly shoot it.

Some of these comments don't quite make sense.

First off, I would not call the 50-140mm f/2.8 a "heavy" lens. Yes, it weighs more than one of Fuji's f/2.0 primes, but it is far, far lighter than the 70-200mm f/2.8 zooms we were using on DSLRs not too long ago. Especially with the excellent OIS, the 50-140mm f/2.8 is easily hand holdable for extended periods.

Agreed, and I've said the 50-140 is much better... but I'm trying to help the OP get useable shots. In a H.S. gym with APS-c, around 60-120 is optimal (depending on where the action is at). If you aren't used to the weight, it would seem heavy, but a monopod would help a lot, as I said.

Secondly, shooting sports is a lot harder at longer focal lengths, not easier. Shooting at 200mm or 300mm will require more effort than at 140mm. The much slower apertures of these longer lenses compound the issues.

I wasn't talking about using the longer focal lengths... my shots that I posted required it (in a much-larger space).

Finally, we have the quirks of these specific lenses. I have not used the 55-200mm for years, but I do regularly use the 70-300mm. I do remember that the AF motor in the 55-200mm was not exactly blazing fast. The 70-300mm is pretty far from being parfocal. This means any time your zoom, your focus plane will shift. A lot. The 50-140mm f/2.8 is also not parfocal, but it does behave a lot better than the 70-300mm. If you are trying to zoom out to maintain framing as an athlete approaches, your odds of maintaining focus are significantly higher with the 50-140mm.

Quite simply, the 50-140mm f/2.8 will be easier to use and perform much better than either the 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 or 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6.

I've said all that, but I'm addressing a specific situation. The 70-300 cannot shoot action while zooming but the 50-140 can - there's a pro sports shooter who has shown that in detail on a YouTube video. In fact, the 70-300 is pretty close to useless in AF-c on the T2 (so far for me, but I have to see if I can find better settings). Then again, the 70-300 tracks much better - same pro shooter has shown - on the bodies that came out this year. Keep in mind even regular sports shooters (non-pros) almost never get good at tracking movement while zooming. I know it isn't something I try to do if I can avoid it.