Best lenses to shoot skiing with

gaddafski

gaddafski

Member
since its that time of year im looking to buy a new lense and i was curious to know what you all prefer when it comes to shooting skiing, i have a t1i btw.
i searched this but couldnt find anything, sorry if its a repeat
 
pretty expensive but i love my canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. i've heard the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is amazing as well, f/4 is solid too if you're looking for something cheaper
 
Tokina 11-16 for wide

Any of the Canon 70-200 telephotos; you can't go wrong. the f/4 is surprisingly amazing for what it is.
 
What do you mean, for what it is? By that im assuming you mean: some of the highest quality glass in the game lmao? It's L glass, and USM AF which is unreasonably good? shooting skiing you wouldn't need anything below f/4 anyways because of snow glare. If you're shooting at night, shoot a longer exposure on a tripod.

Amazing lens, period.
 
i think thats gunna be my next lens, a canon telephoto. not to sure yet.
from what ive heard my canon f/4 17-40 is gunna be great for follow shots. i mean if eheath said so you know its true! haha.
 
If I had to choose just a couple lenses, I would choose:

- A fisheye that will work well on your t2i. Probably just whatever the canon one is for crop sensors. Some people don't like fisheyes, I think the distortion can be real good if done well.

- a super wide, maybe the tokina 11-16. that's not much zoom range, but if you're going wide, you are doing so for a reason.

- a medium zoom, something in the 24-70 range. There's LOTS of lenses in this category, so shop around. Some people prefer the 18-whatevers over the 24, I find I rarely feel the need to shoot between 24mm and 15mm.

- something that's 70-200 ish. Again, lots of options. There's a 70-200 f4 in the canon L series that it seems like people like, but I don't know much about the canon lineup.

This is all personal preference, it all depends on the shot you want and what sort of skiing you like shooting. I also don't know what your price range is. Hope that helps though!
 
you sound like the type of person that shoots at the lowest aperture 97.5% of the time....

lower aperture = lower sharpness sweet spot, thats why f2.8 still trumps the f4 version, even though your not shooting snow at f2.8
 
Actually, I don't.

Obviously yes, the 2.8 is still better for the reasons you mentioned (although it's not as sharp as the f/4 IS period) and low light purposes but some people can't fork out that much cash (including myself) when they're starting out their kit. But, fuck it, if you read test charts on a 70-200 f/4 IS, the lens is pretty much optimal throughout the whole range, with hardly any loss of IQ at f/4. It's the sharpest of all 4 mark one 70-200's. So, my comment stands, and if you want to you could shoot it at f/4 97.5% of the time.

Riddle me that one, Batman.
 
the 80-200 is a must have. I love mine so much, works for everything. but as put above the ideal kit consists of a lens from each catagory.
 
^ and ^^
obvious nikonfags are obvious
although, the canon 80-200 2.8L USM is amazingggggggg. do want. If you can find it op, get it.
 
really really good lens. Very sharp (the non VC version is technically sharper) but getting VC would make all your shots really smooth. If I didn't have a aps-h sensor camera I would have bought it instead of a 17-40
 
word!

if you were gunna use it specifically for everyday filming and poppin ontop of a glidecam would you go with the vc or non vc?
 
because I'm a jew I'd go the non-vc (its sharper too) but the VC would be hella legit, especially if you are doing some handheld shooting. If you have the money then I guess do it.
 
Bahahaha! Yes im soo stealing this phrase.
But back on subject, i own a Tokina 11-16. its an amazing lens. the optics are so nice. very contrasty and sharp as a tack! Ive also got a Nikon 80-200 f/2.8. Same goes for that one, its a superb lens.
 
canon 15mm f2.8 ($650)- great wide angle lens for a rebel, very sharp, not too much distortion but enough... and since it is a prime, you wont have to deal with barrel creep during high speed follow cams.
carl zeiss 50mm f1.4 ($700)- incredible lens, unmatched color accuracy, sharper than a sushi knife, great bokeh, built like a tank, and at $700 that is less than half what a canon 50mm f1.2L goes for.
70-200 f4L USM ($650)- Great light weight telephoto zoom lens. extremely sharp, very fast AF, very solid build quality, not to mention on days you will probably deem worthy to shoot on there will be more than enough light where you wont have to use low f-stops. *besides the cost of a 70-200 f2.8L USM will get you a 70-200 f4L USM and a carl zeiss 50mm f1.4.
 
I've heard a lot of people say that the Canon 70-200 f4 Non IS is the sharpest of the 70-200 series.

Whether or not this is true, I think this lens has a lot of value simply because it weighs a lot less than the other 3 canon 70-200's. They're all great.
 
No, Canon is far from the highest quality glass in the game. It's just decent. I really dislike most of the lenses, with the exception of the 70-200 f/4 non-IS and the 100mm macro.

And yes, you don't need anything faster than f/4 for skiing. Your lenses should be stopped down to lower apertures anyway, like f/8 - f/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top