lens for a high school football game

[rdking647]

i have a question Ive been invited to shoot a high school football game from the sidelines. im debating which lens to bring. 120-300mm f2.8,300 f2.x with a 2x teleconveter or a 150-500 lens? Im thinking the 120-300 since ill want the faster aperture. the game is under the lights at night. ive shot a lot of games from the stands but never from teh sidelines

[xocet]

1. That is an interesting situation...

Unfortunately, here is where I betray my ignorance...

The faster aperture seems necessary unless the field is exceptionally well-lit. Also, if you use the 500mm lens, won't you have to increase the shutter speed to stop the action if you are shooting at 500mm? And, at that point, won't you also have to up the ISO at which you are shooting and thus introduce noise?

Out of curiosity, what is the aperture value of the lens at 300mm - i.e., I presume that f2.8 is at 120 mm? Also, if you are shooting at 300mm, what sort of shutter speed will be sufficient to stop the action? Lastly, on your camera, what sort of ISO setting can you use without introducing a lot of noise or is there a good way to remove noise in post-processing?

At any rate, I hope that the field is well-lit and that your photos turn out as you would like them to be.

[ManiacJoe]

2. Go with the 120-300mm f/2.8

High school under the lights = poorly lit. You will want the wide aperture for the light gathering, and you will still be in the high ISOs to get the needed shutter speed. The 2x converter will eat two stops of light, so it will not be that helpful.

You might want a second lens that gets wider for the closer action and the sideline candids.

[sir pball]

3. Disagree - 300 "2.x" prime and a candid lens on a backup body.

Wide teles are, to put it lightly, expensive - without hunting on B&H since I'm on my phone, the zoom is probabaly 3 or worse at 300. There's a good reason the five-figure lenses tend to be wide primes (Nikkor 400/2.8 is what, $18k?). Stick with the widest lens at the longest aperture for sports. It helps that ISO6400 digital is as good as 800 speed film; that's trivial for the most basic bodies these days, the stratospheric gear makes 12800 look great.

Switching lenses, though? There's a very good reason almost every "true" professional carries around two or three fully equipped cameras - even at a high school game you don't have the minute or so to fish around in your bag and grab a new lens, swap, and tuck the old one away. It may be dying, but pro photography still has its place..

[ManiacJoe]

4. The 300mm f/2.8 would be my second choice.

Switching lenses on a single body would not be the recommendation. You would definitely want two bodies for two lenses.

[jmowreader]

5. Two bodies...

Put the 120-300 on one of them, the 150-500 with the teleconverter on the other.

[xocet]

6. Out of curiosity, how did it go? n/t

[rdking647]

7. it went pretty well

i brought the 120-300. i wasnt sure the game would be played due to a thunderstorm at gametime that delayed the start 45 minutes. i brought a plastic bag to serve as a cover incase of more rain

heres a few shots from the game

[xocet]

8. Thanks for showing off your work. Those are nice photos.

They capture the sport's required physical exertion well. (It would not be good to be tackled by the chin as seen in the third photo.)

The last photograph has an interesting sort of phantom quality about it. The extreme contrast makes for a very stylized effect.