Posts
750
Joined
6/19/2017
Location
South Central, TX
US
Edited Date/Time
8/24/2018 8:49pm
Ok, I've done a search on Vital to see if this has been discussed before, but mainly found older posts discussing older equipment / camera models.
I am going to be purchasing a Sony A6000 mirrorless camera. I would like to purchase ONE good lens for it, that would be good for me to shoot local Motocross races with. Mainly action shots of riders going by, while I'm standing near the edge of the track.
I would like to have a very fast lens, but can't really afford something really, really fast right now. I have ran across this Sigma art lens that goes down to 2.8 and has about a 90mm equivalent focal length (on the a6000). https://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_a_m_60_2p8 It's fast, but also inexpensive. My question would be the focal length. Will 90mm get me close enough to properly frame riders coming by? If not, which fixed focal length should I go for, assuming I do not want to use a zoom lens?
Thanks for anyone that could give me some insight.
I am going to be purchasing a Sony A6000 mirrorless camera. I would like to purchase ONE good lens for it, that would be good for me to shoot local Motocross races with. Mainly action shots of riders going by, while I'm standing near the edge of the track.
I would like to have a very fast lens, but can't really afford something really, really fast right now. I have ran across this Sigma art lens that goes down to 2.8 and has about a 90mm equivalent focal length (on the a6000). https://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_a_m_60_2p8 It's fast, but also inexpensive. My question would be the focal length. Will 90mm get me close enough to properly frame riders coming by? If not, which fixed focal length should I go for, assuming I do not want to use a zoom lens?
Thanks for anyone that could give me some insight.
90mm will not get you close enough. You want to find a 70-200mm or even a 70-300mm but I don't know if you'll find one fast enough. If you're shooting MX, an F4.0 should be good enough unless you really want a shallow depth of field (which means you'll need to capture the rider in the correct place or the shot will be out of focus.) Ask yourself if you really need a 2.8. This might help with your budget as well.
Invest in a good 70-200. I've had mine for over 9 years and it's paid for itself many times over.
Then 90mm is pretty short for moto, and I think you'll really struggle with it, as your only lens. I use a 200mm 2.8 prime (I shoot Canon, FF sensor) 99% of the time.
Your best option is going with something like the Sigma 70-200 2.8, but I'm guessing that is out of your budget? So, you're probably looking at going with the Sony 18-135mm...but the IQ will leave you wanting to upgrade rather quickly...
The Shop
I say this because for the type of shooting he described, a medium to high end f4.0 lens will actually work quite well due to lighting and depth of field forgiveness.
For example, when I shoot action, I'm usually shooting at f5.6 or smaller (aka a bigger number) and typically around 600-2000 Shutter depending on if the rider is coming, going or moving across and if I want motion blur.
The only time I shoot f2.8 is if I'm shooting an stationary object. Very, very rarely do I shoot high speed anything at f2.8 because you have to hit the mark perfect or your shot is out of focus.
Again, for his application, I don't think you can go wrong with a f4.0. (That being said, if you spend the money on a f2.8 now, it might hurt a little to your pocket book, but in the long run, you'll have it for a long long time.) Buying glass is an investment.
If you want to save money, you still won't go wrong with a f4.0 as they're about half the price of a f2.8. Search CL in your area and you'll see what I mean.
Now, personally, I love a shallow DOF, so I'm almost always in the 2.8-3.5 range. Yes, it is a little harder to hit your mark, but I think it makes for a more dramatic shot.
After continuing my research, I've decided that one of the entry to mid level Nikon or Canon DSLRs is probably going to be better than the A6000. You have so much better lens choice with those 2 main brands, than with the Sony mirrorless cameras. I just really liked the idea of having a really small camera body that could still perform well.
So maybe a Nikon D5600 with a Sigma 70-200 2.8. That's going way over budget, but I'm thinking I would be able to get some excellent MX action shots with that combo. I'm going to spend a lot more money though. Might be able to find some good used gear though, to save a few bucks.
My recommendation - a Nikon D5600 with the AF-P DX 70-300 zoom. You should be able to get this kit for less than $1000. For shooting action it will have a much better autofocus system than the A6000, and the zoom will allow much more flexibility with framing your shots.
The lens is slow (it will be f/4.5 at 70mm and f/6.3 at 300) but outdoors that will mostly be ok. For a few hundred extra there is the FX (full frame) version which is slightly faster aperture and reportedly a better overall lens.
With good technique and practice there is no reason you can’t get excellent shots with a setup like that.
Note the Canon equivalent would do equally well, but I use Nikon gear so I’m familiar with their options.
I also use it to shoot skateboarding and it is perfect for upclose action shots.
Regardless of what the aperture is set to for exposure, an f 2.8 lens wide open admits twice as much light for purposes of autofocus operation as an f 4 lens wide open, which allows faster and efficient af pick up tracking. This may or may not matter depending on the capability of the body, which may be an issue with mirrorless.
Generally as well the build quality will be better the faster the lens simply because of the demands of higher optical performance. $$$$ too
With respect to the DOF at which you shoot, I rarely stop down beyond 5.6 for action unless I am trying to capture a wider image or I am getting close to a rider group with the 300 on and want them all sharp.
Either a 2.8 or 4 70-200 is pretty much the foundational lens for an MX kit.
I've bought so many cheap lens, if I would have just got the nice stuff to begin with I prob would have saved more money.
https://fstoppers.com/education/equipment-recommendations-photographing-motocross-279647
https://fstoppers.com/education/tips-how-photograph-motocross-277694
Pit Row
https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/Photo-and-Video,23/Anyone-got-any-photo-…
So what have you?
Well, the go-to lens for most moto photographers (not me!) is an 80-200 or similar. However, for local moto stuff, I'd imagine you can get close to the track pretty easily and that 90mm would work. I will tell you that your bigger hassle will be getting a clean back ground and interesting light. You have to shoot pretty shallow to get the background to go soft but shooting around 2.8 is dicey for sharp focus. Honestly, for shooting moto, where you are shooting out in the sun
so the viewfinder is going to be pretty bright anyway even at f4, those extra stops for the 2.8 may, or may not, be worth the $$$.
THE thing to do is to borrow or rent a lens before you buy one. We can sit here and blab about numbers and AF but it doesn't mean shit if it doesn't fit YOUR vision and work flow. Those fugging 70-200 lenses? I hated mine and was sooooo happy to sell that POS. So go borrow a 90mm and shoot with it and see how it feels before you buy one.
I’ve had great pics that I’ve blown up into poster size and they look crystal clear. That’s with no editing.
Better to see examples of how those various camera functions specifically show in a photo.
Here's one for aperture: https://digital-photography-school.com/aperture/
And one for shutter speed: https://brentmailphotography.com/essentials/shutter-speed-in-photograph…
But then those are just ingredients that the photographer will play with and mold to fit the given situation.
Ok, here is what I'm going to start with. I already owned an Olympus E-420. Which is an older model four-thirds DSLR camera body. Circa 2010 or so.
I never thought about using it for action photography before, because I figured it wouldn't be fast enough. But it does do 3.5 FPS. And after some Google searches related to whether I would actually be able to catch some good MX shots with a camera capable of doing that, many people are saying that you can, as long as you're good at following the action.
I didn't have a long lens (i.e. 70-200) for the e-420 before though, so I went on Ebay and found a really nice Olympus Zuiko Digital 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5. Which actually translates to "80-300" in 35mm terms, because the Olympus four-thirds have a 2x cropping factor. Double your focal length in other words.
It should be in early next week, and I'm hoping to try everything out at a local race coming up at the end of this month.
Thanks again to everyone that replied to this post and gave their advice. If this low budget setup doesn't work out, I'm leaning towards a newer model "entry level" Nikon, plus 'used' 70-200 f2.8' setup. I don't have anything against Canon's. My first "real" 35mm SLR was a Canon. But I've used some recent Nikons and I really liked the feel of them.
Post a reply to: Need Advice - Which Lens Best For Shooting Local MX?