What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Telephoto for Rally Car

D

davidfung

Hi all. Just looking at purchasing some sort of telephoto lens (100mm+) for use in taking at the WRC Rally car racing. There is &le chance to get very close to the cars, as well as seeing the cars slow down considerably (around corners). In addition, there are some fairly fast straights. I am looking for a telephoto (or several) that will serve this purpose. I know that it aint' autofocus and that is more important, but let's assume that I prefocus.

I have looked around, the 135 f/2.8 seems to be a good choice. But what to mate to it? A 180 f/2.8, 200 f/4 or 300 f/4. The f/4 are obviously slower, and may require faster film and/or slower shutter speeeds. But the 180 f/2.8 *seem* to be less sharp at the edges then the other Tele-Tessars, where the sharpness seems to be more constant. (This is reading the MTF, where the 200 and 300 are flatterm and 180 more curved). Can anyone comment on such lenses? Is the 200 better than the 300 optically? I would love to get the 200/2 or 300/2.8, but have not rich enough. I have considered a Can+n system, just for this purpose. That is, telephotos in the 200mm plus. Any comments much appreciated. Thanks!
 
Hi, Primes are fine but the weight adds up and it takes time to switch back and forth. Factor in that, with the proven quality of the Zeiss zooms, and I'd suggest one of the Vario-Sonnars. I have the VS100-300 and it's brilliant, but only f4.5-5.6. You might look at the VS80-200 f4. I understand it's quite good, and appears to be a great deal when bought used. If f4 isn't fast enough consider the Tamron 70-210 f3,5 constant aperture I have one and like it very much, or the Tamron 80-200 f2.8. A friend has the Tamron 80-200 f2.8 and it's performance is top notch. Just buy quality and you'll be happy. Jeff
 
Agree totally with Jeff .... you might not want to muck around changing lenses.

If I could have afforded to buy the VS80-200, I would have done (Hey! anyone got one going cheap!), but I settled on a "couldn't refuse at the price" Tamron SP 80-200 f2.8. It's a big beast, but I'm very happy with it's performance, even wide-open. Great contrast and colour rendition, and nicely built.

Years ago I used to have the SP 70-210 f3.5, it was very good, but I think the 80-200/2.8 is even better. One good thing I can say about the 70-210/3.5 is that it had the best lens hood of any tele-zoom I've ever seen.

It is attached to the zoom ring, not to the filter thread or on the objective sleeve. This zoom lens has the 70 end nearest the camera body, thus the hood is "shorter" at the 70 end, and is "longer" at the 210 end. Perfect!

Having used the Tamron 80-200/2.8 for a couple of years, I'd have to admit that changing to the VS would mainly be a "loyalty" and "trust in the optics" issue rather than "I'm going to get better shots" issue!

Cheers, Bob.
 
I agree too. In the instances where you have to think fast or miss your shot the zooms do have an advantage. Especially if you are doing manual focus on fast action, that zoom will save you additional frustration from not having to swap lenses. Or, if you REALLY do want to use prime fixed focal length lenses, you could have two bodies working at the same time. One hanging off your shoulder while you're shooting the other makes for some pretty fast changes, rather than changing lenses on one body. Luckily, in auto racing you have a fairly predictable path for the cars and that will help you if you are non-auto-focus. Before you invest in the lenses though, you might want to consider going down to the track and seeing how much you can fill the frame with the focal lengths you have now before adding the pricier 300 etc. Post some pics when you start shooting these races- sounds like fun
happy.gif
-Lynn L.
 
Thanks for the comments everyone. Very helpful. I have considered the 80-200 f/4. There was one on at eBay that went for AU$450! I am sad that I missed that one. My concern is that issue that was also raised in the previous post about par-focal. Do I need to refocus when I change the zoom? Given that it is a one-touch zoom, and it'd be pretty hard to not change critical focus when changing focal length. What is the distortion (Siedel abberations) like at the edges for such zooms compared to the primes?

I have two bodies, and was just considering that Lynn. I was thinking of having a 135/85 on one, and a 200/300 on the other. The rally I was thinking of is in Perth, Australia but I live in Victoria, Australia (different state). Would love to have the chance to go on track. But, I hope to practice closer to home, on the freeway and on the main roads at home. Should have a similar scale to the rally tracks.

On a last note, I know that using a monopod is fairly important (I don't want to use flash), only the 200/2, 300/2.8 and 300/4 have a tripod collar. The others do not. How important is this? Considering that I may be using f/4, f/5.6 (at most) with shutters at 1/250? Again, thanks for any and all comments!
 
>>>My concern is that issue that was also raised in the previous post about par-focal. Do I need to refocus when I change the zoom? Given that it is a one-touch zoom, and it'd be pretty hard to not change critical focus when changing focal length. What is the distortion (Siedel abberations) like at the edges for such zooms compared to the primes?<<<

Hi, In my opinion I think you shouldn't concern yourself with all the techno stuff and just shoot. I feel that you can completely complicate matters by worring about factors that are very minor, if they exist at all. The current zooms are generally excellent, and are used by nearly all the pros these days, especially motorsports shooters. I use my zooms professionally (Zeiss and Tamron) with fine results without issues. In fact, I prefer the image quality of my VS100-300 over my TT 300 f4, which I didn't like at all. I think you should shoot and enjoy what you produce. For me it's the thrill of learning, correcting mistakes and getting better. I'd rather be a great photog with a zoom than a poor one with a 200 f2. Just my opinion. Jeff
 
Planar 135/2 plus Mutar I is also a way you could go. I remember to have seen quite nice Formula 1 shoots made with this lens combination.

Mike
 
Hi David,

like many have already written before, I can recommend the Tamron 3.5/70-210 and esp the 2.8/80-200.

If you want to stay with primes - and I expect that you already have the famous 2.8/135 - you never mentioned the 3.5/200. Just a half stop slower than the 2.8/180 and a little bit longer, lighter weight and very good optcally indeed !

If you will use 2 bodies you may try one of them with a zoom and the other with a prime... ?

Best wishes Paul
 
Hi Davide,
Both 180 f2.8 Sonnar and TT 300 F4 are very close in open aperture performance. The 300 f4 is one of the most under-rated CZ lens. Well it was introduced in 1978 and very old design. However it has a very uniform field flatness and low astigmatism at wide open aperture. It is just fast enough for action stopping in car racing. I still find it a fine lens, even though I use much better and expensive Canon white lens EF 300m f2.8L. I also use the N 70-300 VS and C/Y 100-300 VS. No doubt, they have superior contrast and resolution at the image centre at f5.6 than the TT 300 f4 at f4. But these zooms also suffer higher level of astigmatism than the prime, so the edge sharpness of the TT 300 f4
can be a bit better.

The other less expensive alternative is to get a Tamron Adaptall SP 300mm f2.8 IF made with ED glasses. The old version can be found very cheap in the second hand market. The new version is more expensive. I haven't tried the Tamron 300 but other users' feedbacks have been positive.
 
Singlo. Thanks for your info. The second hadn 180/2.8 and 300/4 is indeed quite similar. I also like the 300/4 cause it has the tripod collar. I have heard that this is quite a heavy lens. Do you find that a problem? How about the focus travel and the amount of rotation required to focus from far to near? That is, how much twisting of the focus ring is required to say focus from 5m to 30m and vice versa? Is there much chromatic aberration and colour fringing in the 300/4 near the edges?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top