Camera Lenses

I don't have a specific lens to recommend, but the biggest thing to look for is a low f aperture number. This equals more light which translates to faster shutter speeds. Some brands offer features which make the autofocus quicker, as well.

It depends what kind of camera you have...you can't just throw a Nikon lens (or any other brand for that matter) on a random camera body. Nikon lenses fit Nikon cameras, same for all other brands. Some lesser brands will fit big-name bodies, but for the most part those won't even be high enough quality for shooting indoors (like the previous guy said, the 'speed' is what matters. That's the f-number/maximum aperture. Lower number means faster, and thus more expensive).

If you want to shoot mainly outdoor, the speed won't matter as much...you'd be fine with a cheap f/4-5.6 zoom (like a Tamron 75-300mm for Nikon). That will only cost like $100 or $150 probably and you're getting a lot of zoom. It's not a high quality lens...you get what you pay for. f/5.6 won't be worth anything indoors.

What kind of camera are you using?

I use a Sigma 2.8/70-200mm on my Canon Rebel XTI. The cost difference vs the same Canon lens is about $500. I used the money I saved to get a 1-4 converter making my lens a 70-300. I can shoot indoors w/o flash or strobe and I get stuff published all the time. Don't buy the hype on "better glass". It's all about light entering the camera..........shoot wide open and enjoy. You will be surprised how quick the processor is on the Canons. Outdoors the sport setting is versatile and foolproof in most cases. Let the camera work for you. Frame your shots and crop carefully.

We have a Nikon D3000 with a 55-200 f/4-5.6 already included.

I'm pretty sure a Sigma or Tamron lens would fit with the Nikon camera (though I read that Sigma is a bit better than Tamron).

I basically want to take some shots and not have them come out blurry.

xcrsc01 wrote:

We have a Nikon D3000 with a 55-200 f/4-5.6 already included.

I'm pretty sure a Sigma or Tamron lens would fit with the Nikon camera (though I read that Sigma is a bit better than Tamron).

I basically want to take some shots and not have them come out blurry.

What makes you think that a different lens than your 55-200 will make them "not blurry"? This could very well not be a function of lens (shutter speed, focus, aperture, etc).

For shooting individuals in a large venue like a track, you may need a lot of focal length (300mm+). On the other hand, if you situate yourself strategically, you could without a doubt get great shots with you 55-200.

Using the proper camera settings with your current lens should yield good (or great) results. Without any more information, that's the best advice I can give.

Everything on that page I took with a D3000 and a Sigma 18-250mm. I chose the Sigma as a do-everything lens with great range, but it's not quite as sharp as your Nikon. I shot some other races with my brothers Nikon 55-200 and actually thought his looked a bit better, though it was a pain to change lenses for some of the closer up before/after shots.

I've since upgraded to a D90. Why? Autofocus motor in the body of the camera.

The D3000 is really going to kill you on lens choices because it requires AF-S lenses (newer, less of them, and thus often more expensive), or you have to manually focus. Since you're new, manually focusing on fast moving runners isn't going to work. Your best bet for cheap lenses would be something like a Sigma or Tamron 70-200 f2.8 or one of their 70-300 if you want a little longer range (but slower/less light). But they won't autofocus on a D3000.

Decide if you're serious about getting other lenses and getting into this. If so, ditch the D3000 and get a D90 (or a D80 if you find a good deal). I went through this same thing 6 months ago, and ended up upgrading so I could have more options. If you want the D3000, then the lens you've got and the new AF-S Nikon 70-300mm are probably your best reasonable cost choices. But for the same price as that Nikon 70-300, you could sell the D3000 body, buy a D90 and get a Sigma 70-300. Same price, and now you've got loads of other options available, including the killer 50mm f1.8 or f1.4.

indoors

As far as indoors goes, as much light as you can get is the way to go. Be prepared to be humbled. I'm still learning how to take decent indoor race pictures, but you really have to think about the light. The camera's auto settings will be useless. You set the aperture wide open, the ISO as high as you can tolerate, and then figure out how high a shutter speed you can shoot and still get proper exposure. Minimum of 1/200 for runners (you'll get blurred feet, etc.)..., preferably 1/400 or faster. Think about where light's coming into the room, and position yourself strategically. A little bit of fill flash will go a long way. I shoot everything with my 50mm f1.8 wide open and get as close as I can to the action.

The 2010/03/06 and 2010/02/06 races are my two attempts so far at indoor shots. I learned a bit both times and wish I had a few more opportunities this winter to shoot. The first race was noisy, often out of focus and underexposed. No flash used. The second one I stayed closer to the action, used a little bit of fill flash and got better focus. However, the fill flash washed out the foreground subjects a little too much and I got some red eye. I already have some ideas for how to improve and get better positioning for better lighting, but it'll have to wait until next year.

Sorry, I know it's a lot more than you asked for, but if you're serious about shooting races, it's good to know. You can choose: lots of good cheap lenses available, or a D3000. Not both. And if you want to shoot indoor, be prepared to learn, and be prepared to ditch the D3000. The difference between a fast aperture lens for the D3000 and one for a D90 is more than the difference between a D3000 and a D90.

What makes you think that a different lens than your 55-200 will make them "not blurry"? This could very well not be a function of lens (shutter speed, focus, aperture, etc).

I was asking generally what would be the best set up, whether it be what I have now, or something different. I'm going to test out the current set up in a few weeks at a local meet, then see if I like the results.

Thanks all for your input!