[iceman]

my son is in the ulster u19 squad and was playing a warm up match yesterday i used the smc pentax dal 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED but swapped to Tamron af 100-300 1:5-6.3, what would be the best AF lens for this job.

smc pentax dal 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED


Tamron af 100-300 1:5-6.3


i was wondering is there a autofocus teleconverter so i could use the first lens to make it 400mm

thx in advance.

[Adam]

You should check our pentax lens database as well as third-party Pentax lens database to browse lenses that are currently out there.

I would recommend an F2.8 lens, just as the DA* 200mm F2.8 or Sigma 70-200mm F2.8.

There are autofocus teleconverters from Tamron and Sigma that you could use, but they don't necessarily improve image quality.

My personal preference for sports is a zoom in the 70-200mm range, so I'd recommend the sigma.

[Kerrowdown]

I think that you may need to consider both possibly longer and most definitely faster lenses than you currently have.

Remember that by using teleconverters, this can make lenses even slower by up to a couple of stops, which is not always what you want for fast action.

Now would be a good time to find a friendly bank manager.

Try to get closer to the action, I know that this is not always possible when you already on the touch line. But concentrate on the action when it comes to you, i.e. by staying to the side of the goal line at one end, or where ever you think the best shots will present themselves.

To do this rather the trying to follow the action all over the place, you may find then that 200mm or 300mm will be enough length.

Above, all enjoy your photography.

PS. original OP subject "what is best lens for sport" I guess the true answer would be, one that captures the spectacular action that will a once in a lifetime front cover page shot, that will earn me an absolute fortune, that I missed.

[Mike.P®]

Sigma 100-300mm f4 with the Sigma 1.4x teleconverter if needed.

[iceman]

i manage to raid the piggy bank once already without Mrs devil noticing to get my first dslr, i will have my balls chopped if i attempt again so the sigma is out of my range lol,

would a pentax smc AF 70-200mm F4.5.6 be a much improvement then my 50-200mm and if so much more to justify just a kick instead of a chop lol

i found a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 is this another which is not a improvement.

[deadwolfbones]

Sigma 100-300mm f4 with the Sigma 1.4x teleconverter if needed.

Yes, this is a great solution--probably the best on a smaller budget.

[iceman]

Yes, this is a great solution--probably the best on a smaller budget.

i found this Sigma-AF-100-300mm-f-4-5-6-7-DL-LENS is this the same as mentioned above

[SpecialK]

Yes, this is a great solution--probably the best on a smaller budget.

Over $1200 is not exactly a small budget.

i found this Sigma-AF-100-300mm-f-4-5-6-7-DL-LENS is this the same as mentioned above

Nope. See the difference in aperture values in the descriptions? Small ones cost a lot.

The Tamron 70-200 is a little cheaper ($729) than the 70-200 Sigma ($799), and with a teleconverter will be f4, not f5.6 as with the 100-300 f4 and converter. Also, it is very sharp and can stand some cropping which would approach the 300mm equivalent.

[iceman]

once again i was up in belfast taking photo's of my son's training day and when i got back home in boggy fermanagh i went and along the the lakes and tested out 2 lenses, first one was a Centon 500mm f/8 (Fixed) Mirror Lens the other was a Hanimex 500mm f/8.0 HMC Mirror, i know alot of peeps here are slapping there foreheads and say why why why do people buy these lenses, my answer to this is i wanted distance and googled about a samsung lens and started reading on this forum and advised on a thread these lenses if any.

i know understand why it is better to save up and buy a proper lens after field testing the above 2 as there are total waste of money, i decided to try a 2x tele converter with theTamron af 100-300 1:5-6.3 it was surprisingly much better then the mirror lenses and made me understand more about cameras.......i'm still baffled by techie stuff like aperture values and so on lol.

[RioRico]

...i'm still baffled by techie stuff like aperture values and so on lol.

An aperture value (f-stop) is a fraction, the ratio between the iris opening (hole) and the lens' focal length. So with a lens at f/8, its iris is open to 1/8 the focal length. With a lens at f/2, its iris is open to 1/2 the focal length, a wider opening (bigger hole). Each f-stop lets in twice or half the light of an adjacent f-stop. Going from f/4 to f/5.6 cuts the light in half, so you need to double the exposure time to get the same amount of light on the sensor. The f-stop also determines DOF (depth-of-field) -- the wider the iris, the thinner the DOF -- the smaller the f-stop (iris opening), the thicker the DOF.

[/lecture]

[hcc]

You already received some good advice. Let me add a few suggestions based upon my own experience.

If you shoot in daylight, and as long as the luminosity/light is good, you should not worry about aperture. When the light conditions are poor (e.g. low light, dusk, ..), a large aperture lens (i.e. small f number) is very useful to bring more light into the camera sensor. For daytime shooting, it should not be a major problem for rugby or footies, unless under dark clouds.

For a zoom, another alternative is the 18-250mm : the Pentax DA18-250mm or its brother Tamron 18-250mm. The lens has slightly less reach than the 55-300mm, 70-300mm or 100-300mm, but a teleconverter can help you to increase the range. The DA18-250mm is cheaper than the other lenses and it has its shortsomings. But it could be useful for other types of shootings and be a nice compromise.

Food for thoughts...

[iceman]

thankyou riorico and hcc it is much appreciated and daily i learn more and sorry ask more lol, i have know packed away the 2 500mm mirror lenses to never see the light again, you mention light on the mirror lenses i had to change the iso to get more lighter.

i was playing around the tamron in manual mode, my question is i have a aperture settings and i have been changing the settings but was is the best setting for a normal light day if i have settings from 32 22 16 11 8 5.

[Arpe]

Iceman - if you're a rugby fan check my website (in signature). I use the K-7 with a Sigma 70-200/f2.8, usually with a Sigma 1.4 teleconverter on, until light gets so bad that I take the TC off.

The nice thing about a f2.8 lens is the ability to soften the background with larger apertures (f2.8, 3.5 or 4), plus the extra light getting in through the lens means the camera has a better chance of focussing quickly and accurately.

On a nice day I usually start at speed of 1/750th, f4, and see what ISO results (I use TAv mode). As the light dims I go 1/500, or f3.5, then f2.8. I try not to go below 1/500 but have been known to go to 1/350 and still get some shots to use. Usually max out the ISO at 3200.

By the way, can they play rugby in Ireland? (that's a friendly jibe at our old Irish rivals if you're concerned about it!)

[RioRico]

i was playing around the tamron in manual mode, my question is i have a aperture settings and i have been changing the settings but was is the best setting for a normal light day if i have settings from 32 22 16 11 8 5.

Aperture settings work in combination with the shutter speed to give an exposure.

Let's say it's sunny day and you have your camera in P mode and ISO 100. You aim at a well-lit subject and press the shutter halfway down, so the camera takes an exposure reading. The LED screen might say 100 F16 -- that's 1/100 second at f/16. Well, f/16 is a small aperture, which means you'll have thick DOF -- lots of stuff will be sharp, in-focus.

But if your subject is moving, 1/100 might not be fast enough to prevent blurring. So you turn a thumbwheel to change the settings. You change the speed to 1/200, and the aperture switches to f/11 -- the shutter speed has doubled, and the aperture has opened to twice its previous area. Spin the thumbwheel again, set the shutter to 1/400, and the aperture goes to f/8. Take the shutter to 1/1000, and the aperture opens to f/5.6. Each drop in f-stop, going from f/16 to f/11 to f/8 to f/5.6, lets in twice as much light, and each doubling of shutter speed cuts the light in half, so they balance. That combined, balanced reading is called the EV or Exposure Value.

So you're set to 1/1000 at f/5.6, which means a fast shutter that will 'stop' much action, and a wide aperture... which has much thinner DOF than does f/16, so you must focus much more carefully. This is the basic question of photography -- for any given subject and lighting, what is the best balance of aperture and shutter to give the best picture? Open the aperture wide, which lets you shoot with a fairly fast shutter even in low light, and only a narrow range is in focus. Stop-down the aperture, for maximum in-focus range, and you must use a slow shutter which allows movement to blur.

Back to your question -- what is the best setting on a sunny day? That depends on whether the subject is moving, and how fast; on whether you want a deep in-focus range (ie greater DOF), or if you want to isolate the subject and let the rest of the scene go fuzzy; on whether you're willing to boost ISO and get more noise, in order to get both a fast shutter (to stop motion) AND a narrow aperture (for greatest DOF). There is no solid answer. Shoot a lot of pictures and decide for yourself. That's the major part of learning photography -- JUST DEWW IT!!

[RussellW]

I started with the 50 to 500 bigma, which was fine. However the motorsport work demands grew I then changed to 70-200 and 300 sigma ex lenses and using two bodies.
I'm now looking at a 600 f4 or 500 f4.5 as this will complete the camera bag for sports.

At the end of the day it comes down to budget. what you can afford is where you will go.

have fun