Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

PUC · 03-01-2015, 12:33 AM

Any opinions on the best zoom lens to use for ring side boxing coverage?

**Papa Lazarou** · 03-01-2015, 01:02 AM

I suppose it all depends on the venue and how far away you'll be seated?
Which lenses do you have?

**Kerrowdown** · 03-01-2015, 01:39 AM

Originally posted by PUC

Best Lens for Boxing Match

Also one that's classified as BR instead of WR would be useful.

Oh by the way... the B stands for Blood.

narual · 03-01-2015, 01:40 AM

Ringside implies you'll be front row seats or closer, no? So wide-short tele, and as fast as you can go. Maybe use manual focus with the aperture set high enough to get depth of field that includes one half of the ring, so you don't have to mess around with autofocus, and just a little tweak to focus will get you from one side to the other if they move much.

But that's just guessing. I've never even been to a boxing match, let alone photographed one.

**volley** · 03-01-2015, 03:59 AM

As others have said already ... it depends:-)
Here is what I would do: If it is a small venue and you are really close I'd take my Tokina 2.8/28-70 zoom.
With a little more distance my Sigma 2.8/50-150 would be a better choice.
But it depends on what you want to cover (the complete ring with athlets and referee or more close ups etc.).
You also might want to select manual focus. With the speedy action AF is easily confused by the ropes ...
Have fun and please share some results!

kraigg007 · 03-01-2015, 05:51 AM

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS would do the trick if you are looking for tight shots of the sparring boxers. The lens focuses faster than the Pentax 50-135mm f2.8 and is just as sharp or sharper.

**Lowell Goudge** · 03-01-2015, 06:19 AM - **1 Like**

Go back to basics

Subject size = image size x focal length / distance

The subject is anything from 2 meters tall to just a head shot at about .3 meters
The image is either 0.016 meters (landscape format) or 0.024 meters (portrait format).

So where are you sitting ?

Look at this distance to both the near and far side of the ring, and work out the focal length.

The formula gets rearranged to be

Focal length = image size x distance / subject size
Note that just for the range of possible subjects, the focal length to distance ratio can be 0.08 :1 to 0.008 : 1

**JimD** · 03-02-2015, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by kraigg007

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS would do the trick if you are looking for tight shots of the sparring boxers. The lens focuses faster than the Pentax 50-135mm f2.8 and is just as sharp or sharper.

That would also be my choice

PUC · 03-03-2015, 05:05 PM

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions.
I got access to ringside with the press photographers at a pro boxing match.
I used my Pentax 18-135 /3.5 lens which I found out wasn't quite fast enough and prompted my question, what's the best lens for shooting boxing from ringside.
After reviewing my pictures, reading your comments, and doing a little research of my own here's what I've come up with.
I going to continue shooting with my K3
I'm going to try my 50mm f/1.4 lens for the next match and buy a Pentax 50-135 /2.8 (there's a lot of pros and cons regarding this lens on the web but I like the fact that its a bit ruggedized and weather sealed. And, it can maintain f/2.8 50-135mm if I need it). Because of the APS-C sensor crop factor, the 50-135mm is equal to a 75-202mm lens which may be too long for a boxing ring. But it's the shortest Pentax zoom at f/2.8. So, my 50mm (75mm) may be my best bet.
I'm also going to set my AF to "C" and try shooting in 3 shot bursts to see how that works for me.
I attached one of the photos from the fight

Thanks again,

narual · 03-03-2015, 06:42 PM

The 16-50 is 2.8 and of comparable build quality to the 50-135. There's also a 28-70 in the FA series. And third party lens makers like Sigma and Tamron have 16/17-50ish 2.8 lenses as well as 24/28-70/75 2.8 lenses.

The 50-135 is a wonderful lens, but probably too long for that use. That close, I'd think something in the 24/28-70/75 range would be ideal. If you go wide enough and use a smaller aperture, you can just prefocus and have zero delay for focusing. You can crank the ISO up to get the shutter speed you need, if you can't use a flash. It's a lot better to have a great shot with some noise than a noise-free shot with motion blur or missed focus.

peterjcb · 03-03-2015, 08:00 PM

think out of the box and take something really wide to get a different perspective...something like the DA15 or the 10-17 Fisheye
I'd also bring the FA77

narual · 03-04-2015, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by peterjcb

think out of the box and take something really wide to get a different perspective...something like the DA15 or the 10-17 Fisheye
I'd also bring the FA77

A sigma 10mm sitting on the edge of the ring and tilted slightly up would be pretty cool, if the boxers were up close. Or an 8mm fisheye - you'd get the boxers up close, and show the whole arena behind them

PUC · 03-04-2015, 03:36 PM

Thanks for all the ideas and suggestions
Lots of great info

Nicolas06 · 03-05-2015, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by PUC

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions.
I got access to ringside with the press photographers at a pro boxing match.
I used my Pentax 18-135 /3.5 lens which I found out wasn't quite fast enough and prompted my question, what's the best lens for shooting boxing from ringside.
After reviewing my pictures, reading your comments, and doing a little research of my own here's what I've come up with.
I going to continue shooting with my K3
I'm going to try my 50mm f/1.4 lens for the next match and buy a Pentax 50-135 /2.8 (there's a lot of pros and cons regarding this lens on the web but I like the fact that its a bit ruggedized and weather sealed. And, it can maintain f/2.8 50-135mm if I need it). Because of the APS-C sensor crop factor, the 50-135mm is equal to a 75-202mm lens which may be too long for a boxing ring. But it's the shortest Pentax zoom at f/2.8. So, my 50mm (75mm) may be my best bet.
I'm also going to set my AF to "C" and try shooting in 3 shot bursts to see how that works for me.
I attached one of the photos from the fight

Thanks again,

Just to say: 50-135 AF is quite slow and a bit difficult for action shoots. It might not be the best lense for the job.

03-01-2015, 12:33 AM	#1
PUC New Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 17	Best Lens for Boxing Match Any opinions on the best zoom lens to use for ring side boxing coverage?

03-03-2015, 05:05 PM	#9
PUC New Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 17 Original Poster	Thanks for all the comments and suggestions. I got access to ringside with the press photographers at a pro boxing match. I used my Pentax 18-135 /3.5 lens which I found out wasn't quite fast enough and prompted my question, what's the best lens for shooting boxing from ringside. After reviewing my pictures, reading your comments, and doing a little research of my own here's what I've come up with. I going to continue shooting with my K3 I'm going to try my 50mm f/1.4 lens for the next match and buy a Pentax 50-135 /2.8 (there's a lot of pros and cons regarding this lens on the web but I like the fact that its a bit ruggedized and weather sealed. And, it can maintain f/2.8 50-135mm if I need it). Because of the APS-C sensor crop factor, the 50-135mm is equal to a 75-202mm lens which may be too long for a boxing ring. But it's the shortest Pentax zoom at f/2.8. So, my 50mm (75mm) may be my best bet. I'm also going to set my AF to "C" and try shooting in 3 shot bursts to see how that works for me. I attached one of the photos from the fight Thanks again, Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
An impossible ask? Best lens/lens combo for new K-30 user	JPE	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	26	09-23-2013 05:57 PM
Best lens for portrait	Leonski, Macedonia	Visitors' Center	7	08-06-2013 03:31 PM
best lens for Autocross	Jane	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	03-15-2013 02:09 PM
Tips for taking boxing pictures with KX	whatamiat	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	03-22-2011 05:19 PM
K-x for boxing photography	whatamiat	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	11-30-2010 02:39 AM

03-01-2015, 01:02 AM	#2
Papa Lazarou Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Bletchley, Buckinghamshire, UK Posts: 340	I suppose it all depends on the venue and how far away you'll be seated? Which lenses do you have?

03-01-2015, 01:39 AM	#3
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,866	Originally posted by PUC Best Lens for Boxing Match Also one that's classified as BR instead of WR would be useful. Oh by the way... the B stands for Blood.

03-01-2015, 01:40 AM	#4
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	Ringside implies you'll be front row seats or closer, no? So wide-short tele, and as fast as you can go. Maybe use manual focus with the aperture set high enough to get depth of field that includes one half of the ring, so you don't have to mess around with autofocus, and just a little tweak to focus will get you from one side to the other if they move much. But that's just guessing. I've never even been to a boxing match, let alone photographed one.

03-01-2015, 03:59 AM	#5
volley Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Springe Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,693	As others have said already ... it depends:-) Here is what I would do: If it is a small venue and you are really close I'd take my Tokina 2.8/28-70 zoom. With a little more distance my Sigma 2.8/50-150 would be a better choice. But it depends on what you want to cover (the complete ring with athlets and referee or more close ups etc.). You also might want to select manual focus. With the speedy action AF is easily confused by the ropes ... Have fun and please share some results!

03-01-2015, 05:51 AM	#6
kraigg007 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 195	Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS would do the trick if you are looking for tight shots of the sparring boxers. The lens focuses faster than the Pentax 50-135mm f2.8 and is just as sharp or sharper.

03-01-2015, 06:19 AM - 1 Like	#7
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,892	Go back to basics Subject size = image size x focal length / distance The subject is anything from 2 meters tall to just a head shot at about .3 meters The image is either 0.016 meters (landscape format) or 0.024 meters (portrait format). So where are you sitting ? Look at this distance to both the near and far side of the ring, and work out the focal length. The formula gets rearranged to be Focal length = image size x distance / subject size Note that just for the range of possible subjects, the focal length to distance ratio can be 0.08 :1 to 0.008 : 1

03-02-2015, 12:15 AM	#8
JimD Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Newport, South Wales Posts: 187	Originally posted by kraigg007 Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS would do the trick if you are looking for tight shots of the sparring boxers. The lens focuses faster than the Pentax 50-135mm f2.8 and is just as sharp or sharper. That would also be my choice

03-03-2015, 06:42 PM	#10
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	The 16-50 is 2.8 and of comparable build quality to the 50-135. There's also a 28-70 in the FA series. And third party lens makers like Sigma and Tamron have 16/17-50ish 2.8 lenses as well as 24/28-70/75 2.8 lenses. The 50-135 is a wonderful lens, but probably too long for that use. That close, I'd think something in the 24/28-70/75 range would be ideal. If you go wide enough and use a smaller aperture, you can just prefocus and have zero delay for focusing. You can crank the ISO up to get the shutter speed you need, if you can't use a flash. It's a lot better to have a great shot with some noise than a noise-free shot with motion blur or missed focus.

03-03-2015, 08:00 PM	#11
peterjcb Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Weddington, NC Posts: 468	think out of the box and take something really wide to get a different perspective...something like the DA15 or the 10-17 Fisheye I'd also bring the FA77

03-04-2015, 08:52 AM	#12
narual Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,988	Originally posted by peterjcb think out of the box and take something really wide to get a different perspective...something like the DA15 or the 10-17 Fisheye I'd also bring the FA77 A sigma 10mm sitting on the edge of the ring and tilted slightly up would be pretty cool, if the boxers were up close. Or an 8mm fisheye - you'd get the boxers up close, and show the whole arena behind them

03-04-2015, 03:36 PM	#13
PUC New Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 17 Original Poster	Thanks for all the ideas and suggestions Lots of great info

03-05-2015, 11:34 PM	#14
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by PUC Thanks for all the comments and suggestions. I got access to ringside with the press photographers at a pro boxing match. I used my Pentax 18-135 /3.5 lens which I found out wasn't quite fast enough and prompted my question, what's the best lens for shooting boxing from ringside. After reviewing my pictures, reading your comments, and doing a little research of my own here's what I've come up with. I going to continue shooting with my K3 I'm going to try my 50mm f/1.4 lens for the next match and buy a Pentax 50-135 /2.8 (there's a lot of pros and cons regarding this lens on the web but I like the fact that its a bit ruggedized and weather sealed. And, it can maintain f/2.8 50-135mm if I need it). Because of the APS-C sensor crop factor, the 50-135mm is equal to a 75-202mm lens which may be too long for a boxing ring. But it's the shortest Pentax zoom at f/2.8. So, my 50mm (75mm) may be my best bet. I'm also going to set my AF to "C" and try shooting in 3 shot bursts to see how that works for me. I attached one of the photos from the fight Thanks again, Just to say: 50-135 AF is quite slow and a bit difficult for action shoots. It might not be the best lense for the job.