Which lens for kids soccer?

If I had only one focal length, I'd go 135mm.

RattyMouse said:

I'm not a sports photographer, I"m a dad.

Click to expand...

With wrong priorities. It is not about what you do, but about your son. So, don't be sissy and get 70-200 L. Tele primes are not for amateurs sports. If you still place yourself above your son photography, get wide prime and learn how you could get closer to the gate.

You should be able to get action at 1/250 so, since soccer is outside, you usually won't need a really fast lens. If you won't use a zoom, do get a 2x converter. Soccer fields are HUGE and you will have action that is very far away, and some not so far. It can depend on if you will be close to the sideline or farther back, up in some stands. I find a 135 about perfect for basketball and some of the action will be at about that distance. For the rest of the field the 2x will work. You're smart enough to know how important a tri- or mono-pod is.

But really, zooms are perfect for sports. On the rare occasion I get a chance to shoot surfing, I use a 100-300mm zoom with the 2x.

I recommend that you get a zoom that goes up to 200mm or 300mm, ISO 400 film and enjoy your children.

I was not too successful with a Diana Camera...oh, well.

You might get some good shots with a manual focus prime but it will limit your scope and unfortunately we know that photography makes no concessions to the fact that you are a dad and not a professional photographer.

I suspect that at the end of the day none of us are telling you anything that you don't already know or at least suspected about the difficulties/limitations involved with manual primes or even slow AF.

You might want to try and get an old book on sports photography before the days of zooms and AF. The people who had to do their best with the limitations imposed on them are also the best "instructors" on what to do

pentaxuser

Vaughn said:

I was not too successful with a Diana Camera...oh, well.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about it, Vaughn. You do damn well with an 8x10!

Hatchetman said:

If I had only one focal length, I'd go 135mm.

Click to expand...

Maybe even 127mm...




(Just grab what you have and go enjoy the games... )

Alan Gales said:

I wouldn't worry about it, Vaughn. You do damn well with an 8x10!

Click to expand...

I was going to say that with the 8x10 at least I had them standing still for 30 seconds to a couple minutes -- but then remembered that I think I saw one or two of them standing still on the soccer field for that long during games occasionally!

Great, Bill! Let the action come to you!

I know I spent 99% of my time on the wrong side of the field from where the action always was.

One thing I love about my 1V is that I already had an investment in canon lenses from my digital days. I happen to be a big fan of Tamron for EOS. Personally I'd use the Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD VC. The biggest advantages: it's small, light, has the vibration compensation, AF on that camera, and Tamron has amazing support- for 6 years I think you can send it in to correct any issues free (well, from normal use, that is!). It's not a prime, but it's very versatile.

I've photographed dozens of soccer games using both film and the other technology from tiny kids through high school. I am also a soccer coach and soccer referee. So, you have some things to consider. Your access to the touchline/sideline may be very limited and you might only be able to get at the technical area. Being on or behind the goal line is seriously frowned upon and will probably not be allowed. Besides, if your son is is playing GK, the goal line is not a particularly good vantage point. Better off to be near the technical area. Also, remember you will probably have assistant referees constantly in motion to deal with on the touchline.

At high school, you will be dealing with a full-size field, probably laid over an American football field, so that gives you a typical field size of 75 x 120 yards. If you son will be playing GK and you are allowed at the touchline, your minimum working distance will be at the nearest (parallel) point is 30 to 40 yards. If you are within the technical area, you'll be off-axis at a 60 degree (give or take) angle and about 75 yards away. Of course, remember that for half the game, he'll be on the other end of the field, so you can make that 90 yards. You will probably not be allowed on the opposing team's touchline. If you are restricted to the bleachers, you can double these distances.

You may also find that you get caught up in the action and want to shoot other scenes besides your son. Soccer matches can be very colorful and dynamic.

You really may wish to re-think the zoom, especially if you are shooting slides as the framing will change from second to second. Speaking in 35mm terms, an 80-200mm zoom won't cut it. Zoom or not, 135mm is the shortest you will use. To get a good shot across the field really takes 500mm. A 100-300mm zoom is the minimum for this job. I have found that my 100-300mm Tamron on my APS-C sensor K200D works well as the field of view is more like a 450mm. The same 100-300mm works well on my ME Super if I am using 250 speed 5207 film, which can be enlarged and cropped, but lighting can be a challenge.

A really fast lens is not that necessary. Neither are very high shutter speeds. "Stop motion" tends to look un-real. A little blur adds a sense of motion. Soccer is (well, should be) a fast, contact sport.

As far as film is concerned, for late afternoon or evening games, 800 ISO is your minimum and 1600 is better yet. At a bright morning or early afternoon game you can get away with ISO 400 or 200 if you are really in practice. I have shot a good bit of 5207 (250D ECN-2 film) recently with wonderful results. And don't forget something nice and gritty like Tri-X because it conveys more of the atmosphere of a spirited game.

As far as manual or auto-focus, I have found that my auto-focus is usually focused on the wrong thing, so I normally use manual. I learned to follow football action shooting for my college newspaper back in the 80s with an 80-200 zoom and HP5. You had to follow the framing and the focus constantly with the zoom if you wanted to get the shots that got published.

As always, YMMV. Enjoy your kid's games. They are a blast!

-- Jason

RattyMouse said:

My son is starting up high school soccer this year and I'd like to get a lens that can photograph this from the sidelines. I dont want a super telephoto lens unless I have to go that deep into it. I was hoping that a 200mm f/2.8 L lens would work, or even a 135mm f/2. Would either of these give decent pictures of the action?

The camera I intend to use is a Canon 1V.

On another note, how difficult is it to manual focus a telephoto on soccer action? I have a Nikon FM2N and could go with 300+MM lenses with that camera.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

200 sorta works but in my opinion is not enough.

100-400 or the sigma 150-600

If you don't do zooms then the 400 5.6L (got mine for $800 australia) , or if you're rich the 600f4

the pros shoot with long lenses for a reason. Look at this photo:

https://newsi.creativecow.com/i/879326/1.jpeg

How many 135s and 200s you see there?

You should not be manually focussing. You should set custom function 4 and use the * button to focus on your preferred subject, firing shots as needed. servo focus. You can use tracking too, however personally I prefer to turn it off, as the camera drops the subject too much.

kb3lms said:

I've photographed dozens of soccer games ... I am also a soccer coach and soccer referee. So, you have some things to consider....

-- Jason

Click to expand...

Awesome tips Jason!

Hire a pro, enjoy the games and much* better photos.

*The pro will be using the right gear for the task.

I use a zoom at my daughter's soccer games, and usually have it out to 200mm the whole time. Sometimes I want to get a whole-field shot, and go wider, but almost all my actions shots are at 200. I do have a 135L I want to try, but may decide to slap on a 1.4x anyway.
Also, I picked up a Tamron 150-600. Can't wait to try that one out.
You also have the option to pick up a 1n cheap, and carry it with a different lens, just in case.

For 35mm film, manual focus, I would go with a push-pull 80-200 zoom. The Nikon 80-200/f4.5 version 1, that I used in the 70s was a dream lens, and I would use it again. Although I would get the later version.

As for no zoom. That was me in high school, with a limited/low budget.
105, 135, 200, 300
Lens selection depends on where YOU are and where the subject/action is. You can use any of the lenses, you just have to be more selective, in where you shoot, considering the limitation of the focal length selected.
Example, the 300 is rather long, but it allows you to shoot the other end of the field, and some neat shots up the length of the field. I used this lens in high school for football, soccer, baseball, etc.
If you are in the stands, then the 300 (or longer) is likely the lens you need.

As for focusing, it was easy, for me. But you NEED a LOT of practice, and a smooth focusing ring, to be able to follow the action. If the focusing ring is stiff with dried grease, it ain't goina be easy.

RattyMouse said:

My son is starting up high school soccer this year and I'd like to get a lens that can photograph this from the sidelines. I dont want a super telephoto lens unless I have to go that deep into it. I was hoping that a 200mm f/2.8 L lens would work, or even a 135mm f/2. Would either of these give decent pictures of the action?

The camera I intend to use is a Canon 1V.

On another note, how difficult is it to manual focus a telephoto on soccer action? I have a Nikon FM2N and could go with 300+MM lenses with that camera.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

This one of those few cases where I would go with a medium-range zoom.Nikon has a 70-300AF zoom that would fit the bill.

RalphLambrecht said:

This one of those few cases where I would go with a medium-range zoom.Nikon has a 70-300AF zoom that would fit the bill.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but as I mentioned before, I'm simply not interested in zooms. ALL I wanted to know was what focal length was most suitable for use on a soccer field. Any and all posts telling me to get a zoom have been ignored. I dont know how much more clear I can be on this.

200 2.8 or 135 2.0, and a 1.2 or 1.4 TC. Depending on your budget think about a Tonkia or Sigma 300 or 400 5.6 I just picked up a Tonkia AF 400 5.6 in Minolta A, I use on my Minolta 9 and 9000. The AF is fast, lens speed is good enough for outdoor. Once you starting looking at long lens in 2.8 and 4 range price really jumps. If you have a second EOS body a 135 on one and 300 or 400 on the other? Another reason for a second body is that a second body allows you keep on shooting when the first body runs out of film. If you don't a have monopod you might want to add one to your list if you get a lens longer 200.

Paul Howell said:

200 2.8 or 135 2.0, and a 1.2 or 1.4 TC. Depending on your budget think about a Tonkia or Sigma 300 or 400 5.6 I just picked up a Tonkia AF 400 5.6 in Minolta A, I use on my Minolta 9 and 9000. The AF is fast, lens speed is good enough for outdoor. Once you starting looking at long lens in 2.8 and 4 range price really jumps. If you have a second EOS body a 135 on one and 300 or 400 on the other? Another reason for a second body is that a second body allows you keep on shooting when the first body runs out of film. If you don't a have monopod you might want to add one to your list if you get a lens longer 200.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your suggestion!

If you want to think outside the box think about a Minolta AF body like the 800SI, or even the 9000 with a motor drive, then a couple of less expensive 3rd party primes, L glass can be pricy, Minolta A mount is much less expensive. You can pick both a 800 SI and a Sigma 400 5.6 for under $200, but then again a reason to buy L glass, or EOS 1V was the sports camera of the day.

Depends what you are trying to do. An 800mm would be useless trying to take shots on the sidelines, listening to coach, celebrating afterward, smiling with friends, etc etc.

Hatchetman said:

Depends what you are trying to do. An 800mm would be useless trying to take shots on the sidelines, listening to coach, celebrating afterward, smiling with friends, etc etc.

Click to expand...

The 800 SI is the camera, not the lens, lens would a Sigma or Tonkia 300 or 400, but your right a normal to short tele would be needed on a second body. In this case the Canon 1V.

Can the 1V be made to take an FD lens.?
Those Zooms are incredibly affordable.