02-11-2014 12:27 PM
I shoot a lot of indoor gymanstics. I have the 135 2.0 lens but still battle with blur. Is the 85mm 1.2 an appropriate lens or is it best left for portrait work. I've read a fair amount about it and seen some conflicting info.
02-11-2014 01:11 PM
To have a better understanding of your issue, please let everyone know what camera you are using. That way, community will be able to assist you with suggestions appropriate for your product.
If this is an urgent support need, please CLICK HERE to reach our friendly Technical Support Team by phone or email.
02-11-2014 06:36 PM
I use an EOS 7D. I mentioned I have the 135 2.0 lens. I also have the 200 2.8. Most of my shooting is indoors at 30 to 70 feet from my target. I'm looking for a lens that will allow me to capture fast moving gymnasts without a lot noise from turning up the ISO. I've been looking at the 85 1.2 but have seen comments that it is not a sports lens. For the price, I don't want to risk be dissatisfied.
02-11-2014 08:07 PM
Both lenses are stellar lenses. The 85 1.2 is no doubt one of Canon’s best L lenses and perfect for portrait photography. The 85 has one of the creamiest bokeh I have seen from Canon lenses. However I would not use this for high speed indoor shooting because this lens is quite big and chunky and is slow as a tortoise (especially when focusing). The 135 2 is also a good lens, but I find the range very limiting and not that useful. For high speed indoor shooting I would rather shoot with a lens that is more versatile, because with primes your range is quite limited. I prefer the 70-200 2.8 because due to its versatility (range), IS IS IS IS (image stabilization), and its large aperture (which will give you nice blur) if its from theater to outdoor sports. I hope this helps
02-11-2014 08:21 PM
this should help out
02-11-2014 09:02 PM - edited 02-18-2014 01:51 PM
I use the EF 24-70/2.8 and EF 70-200/2.8 IS quite a bit for sports photography, indoors and out.
Indoor lighting might force you to use a fairly high ISO on your camera, in order to get a fast enought shutter speed. I use 7D up to 1600 any time and 3200 without too much concern, just a little extra noise reduction in post-processing.
As mentioned, the 85/1.2L is a wonderful portrait lens, but not designed for sports. With such a large aperture lens, depth of field is naturally very shallow. So precise focusing is important. The 85/1.2L appears to have what's called "long throw" focus... this is slower, but more precise, by design.
Among other lenses, I also use the 135/2, EF 85/1.8 and EF 50/1.4 for sports. Unlike the 85/1.2, they are quite fast focusing and very capable of keeping up with fast action. Your 200/2.8 should offer similarly fast performance. Prime lenses aren't as convenient as zooms, but many offer at least one stop larger aperture than any zoom. So you have to weigh the need for all the light you can gather against the convenience of a zoom.
02-11-2014 09:58 PM
02-11-2014 11:27 PM
02-12-2014 09:40 AM
Contrary to other thoughts Alan has the correct solution;
"I use the EF 24-70/2.8 and EF 70-200/2.8 IS quite a bit for sports photography, indoors and out."
This is as good as it gets from Canon. Remember f-ratio is not the single consideration to photography. Alan is aware of this fact.
Another fact is the 24-70mm on your camera is more in line with a 38-112. This is a very friendly range for indoor sports. Now couple it with the 70-200mm (112-320m) and you basically have it covered. Reasonable aperture and very fast reliable focus performance.
A prime lens i.e. 135mm f2 is more difficult to use for sports and likely why no pro I know of uses one (for sports).
Your 7D is very useable at 1600 and even 3200 ISO. WIth 320mm, equivalent, you should not need great enlargements so high ISO should not be a problem.