Quote:
Originally Posted by dcstep
I don't understand your problem. I wander through the woods, climb over rocks and felled trees, wade through mud, etc., with two camera bodies, two mounted lenses, including a super-telephoto, along with two-lenses in my vest and two teleconverters. How is being at the track going to be worse than that? Do you ride on the hood of one of the trucks?
Reliability of an L-series lens is going to beat a Tamron or Sigma in the long haul, but the Tammy/Siggy new lenses are not all-plastic throw aways either.
I think that 400mm is sufficient for most, but not all, race shooting. It'll depend on your access. If you have credentials and get into the pro photo areas, then 400mm will likely be enough. That's a way of saying that a 100-400mm might be enough, as would an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS-II with an EF 2.0x TC-III, all driven by a 1D X. Another ideal lens is the 200-400mm with the built in 1.4x TC. That's be kick ass for cars and trucks.
You didn't pin a $ limit, so I'm giving you a whole range of options, from 1,000-bucks to mega-bucks.
Dave
|
I get full access everywhere I go, the 70-200 has been good for GRC, but its a little shorter for more open forms of racing. I have a sigma lens but I dont know how tough a tammy lens is. Also hows the focusing speed and accuracy of it? Range is anywhere south of $2000.
Also I work for GRC (I shoot for their media releases and most of the stuff on their social media)