What lenses do people use to shoot VBall in dark indoor gyms? My 50 1.8 does okay for near...70-300 not very good for far..too slow. Do I need an 85mm f1.8 or a 135 f2.0 given my budget. Swore Nikon made the 105 f/2.5 autofocus...but can't find one...so I am both older and dumber than dirt???? Your help many times please....Bart

I think the 70-200 f2.8 AFS would be a good solution for you. It's an absolutely tack sharp lens, fast at f2.8 and at least for me has been able to cover sports shots like soccer games. I don't do any indoor stuff, but previous forum topics on this usually concentrate on the poor light and how to help out with some flash. If you're using a D300, beware of pushing the ISO too high as you might start getting some pretty weird effects from the gym lights.

My daughter played vollyball and I even bought a 50 f1.4 just to try and get some good shots. It was not afs and to slow. It was school ball so I could get right beside the court but just never got many sharp pics. At f1.4 the depth of field was so shallow that created a problem of it's own. Also I was shooting at ISO 1250 to 1600 just to get 1/250 to 1/320 shutter speed and with fast action that is still just not fast enough IMHO. BUT if you can add a flash things change in a hurry. Some places you can get away whith flash but some will make you turn it off just depends on what level of vallyball.



Foley

last spring I was shooting with a D80 at iso 1600 and the 80-200 af-d (the non-af-s version). The first game my shots looked like crap, but by the third game my shots improved dramatically. I have to say if I could only have two focal lengths, it would be around 80mm and 200mm. i'd say 85mm 1.8 would be the way to go, too bad Nikon doesn't make a 200mm 2.8 ultrasonic for $600 that is tack sharp like canon. I have heard of CA in the 85mm, but if you have D300 it actually corrects CA (no i am not kidding). the 135 f2 is twice as expensive, and designed for portraits.

Anyone have experience with the Tokina 50-135 or the Sigma 50-150mm for Sports...these are both smaller and lighter...the question is can they focus in real time for a game like Basketball or Volleyball??? 600 is a lot closer than 1700$...
thanks all... B

I shot 4 days of Vball with D2h and a 85mm f1.8 at 800 asa. This was 2 years ago, now with a D3 who cares? I could shoot a 6400 asa and be OK so a 70-200 would be great.
Gav

In terms of a general purpose lens those suggesting the 70-200 (or 80-200) f/2.8 are a really good start. I've had luck with my 70-200 AF-S in some pretty dark (small highschool) gyms, although clearly brighter is better and for the lens faster would be better. But the 70-200 is such a great general lens that as a photo investment it makes quite a bit of sense.

I've also found that each generation of camera helps with better AF and more importantly better high ISO noise characteristics.--David

Ok as a sport photography enthusiast I can very much understand where the question is coming from. The correct answer (if there really is one) depends a lot on the budget of the photographer. If money is no issue, get a D3 and a 70-200 F2.8 VR lens and you will blow people away with the quality of your photos. ISO 6400 is as good as ISO 800 on my D200 and so very fast shutter speeds will be really easy. If money IS an issue, get a 70-200 on your current body and set your camera to shutter priority and select a speed of between 200 - 400. This should get you acceptable results. If money is a VERY BIG issue, get a 50mm 1.8, and set the camera as above. Don't shoot at 1.8 or you will hardly get anything sharp. Between F2.8 and F4 will get you acceptable results. Take a look here for a few shots with a 50mm 1.8 on a D200 http://www.esnips.com/doc/c72ec184-93e7-47be-b257-f2900bcd71e9/KEV_6024
and have a look at the rest of the photos if you like.

i have to say i have never understood why anyone would shoot in shutter priority if the fastest shutter speed possible is wanted (please shed light on that matter if u can), i would say shooter aperture priority

Ok I'll explain my view. Since I was shooting with a 50mm F1.8, I had to compromise between fast shutter speed(large aperture) and DOF. Since the widest acceptable aperture for decent dof was somewhere near 2.8 and I needed at least a shutter speed of between 250 and 400, I set the camera to shutter priority and set it to 1/320 s and let the camera set the aperture. Mind you I almost always use Aperture priority, but with the 50mm when shooting fast action sports from close setting aperture for adequate dof is a hit and miss thing. Oh if shooting with a 70-200 F2.8 I'd use aperture priority and not worry too much about depth of field.