Best Lens for Sports Photography

JNR wrote:

Bill Ferris wrote:

JNR wrote:

Bill Ferris wrote:

JNR wrote:

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.

The 70-300 and 55-200 are too slow for sports photography. The 50-140 is the obvious best option for basketball, assuming the OP will have courtside access and the freedom to roam.

Likely true for some rural and olden days gyms, but not true for the majority of situations now. You aren't respecting the OP's explanation that he is a hobbyist, and the timing of the situation.

If disrespect has been extended toward the OP, it was your assertion that they don't have time to learn to use the 50-140mm f/2.8 properly. It's equivalent to a full-frame 70-210mm, which is a good match for the standard zoom range for indoor sports. In a very well-lit arena, the OP could be working at f/2.8, 1/1000, ISO 3200. At those same exposure settings, the OP would be at ISO 12800 with the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 or something like ISO 8000 with the 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8.

The OP said he is a hobbyist, and he has less than a month to get ready for the shoot. If you became a sports shooting pro in a month, I'm impressed. You're disrespecting him by not taking into account what is practical based on the challenge.

I hope we can agree that the goal, here, is to recommend a lens that will help the OP get the shots they envision getting. To suggest that the OP should decline to get the best lens for the job because it's over their head ignores the fact that the OP has already purchased the $2,500 X-H2S. They've invested in Fuji's best - arguably among the best available from any brand - fast action camera body, available. If the OP is up to the challenge of mastering the X-H2S's autofocus system in a month, I fail to see why we should assume they're incapable of figuring out how to point a lens, frame a shot, and press the shutter release in the same time window.

The 50-70mm f/2.8 is literally the perfect choice in a native X-mount option for the use the OP has in mind. Please, let's not get in the way of what should be a pretty easy decision.

You don't shoot boys high school basketball, I'd have to guess. You really don't need 1/1000th for college, let alone high school. See the photos posted above. Shot with what I had with me that night. Again, compared within the same range (70-200), the two XF lenses are a little less than one-third of a stop difference. Also, take care with established facts... the 70-300 starts at f/4 not f4.5.

I haven't shot high school sports. I've shot college sports and in my experience f/2.8, 1/1000 is a good target for exposure settings that will consistently freeze action while balancing the need to deliver a reasonable amount of light to the sensor. I've also shot in indoor arenas that require ISOs in the 6400+ range at those settings. That's why I can't endorse a recommendation of an f/4.8 or f/5.6 lens for high school sports. Also, it's generally the case that an f/2.8 zoom will be manufactured with more powerful focus motors allowing for quicker focus acquisition and more nimble tracking of focus. Given the price of the 50-140, I'd expect it to be a solid performer in those areas.

There's room to adjust the settings I target for sports. I've gone as slow as 1/640 with the 70-200 but was not pleased with the keeper rate. Too many photos had motion blur. A shutter speed of 1/800-second is my minimum with that lens. Varsity boys basketball players may not all be as quick as college athletes, in general, but they're not that far behind. And some are as quick or quicker.

Here's a wide-angle shot made at 16mm, f /4, 1/500, ISO 4000. It's been lifted 0.5 stop in LRC. In a dark venue, a wide-angle lens can deliver some nice group action shots at slower shutter speeds. But that perspective doesn't tell the whole story.

70mm, f/2.8, 1/800, ISO 4500

I included this shot because it was made at f/4.5, 1/800, ISO 4500. It's been lifted 0.8 stop in LRC.

200mm, f/2.8, 1/1250, ISO 6400 (volleyball is the fastest sport I've shot; pretty intense)

78mm, f/3.2, 1/1250, ISO 125 (Outdoor sport in midday light)

112mm, f/2.8, 1/1000, ISO 5600

70mm, f/2.8, 1/1000, ISO 8063 (You get some interesting ISO selections in auto ISO)

The 70-300mm is f/5.6 at the long end. That's two full stops slower than the 50-140 and is much longer than is needed for basketball. The 55-200 is f/4.8 at the long end (1.5 stops slower) and, again, longer than needed for basketball.

If the OP were on a budget and had expressed a need for a lens that could be used for field sports as well as basketball, those lenses might be good options. The OP isn't on a budget and has asked for guidance in selecting a good lens specifically for basketball. If the $1,350 price tag for that lens is more than they'd like to spend, consider buying used. Good copies of the 50-140mm can be found in the $900 range.

The obvious choice in a native X-mount lens for the OP's stated interests and needs is the 50-140mm f/2.8.