Choice of lens will be governed mostly by the distance your intended subject is from the camera position.

In my case, I'm often only a few feet from the track's edge and I could possibly get away with using my DA* 16-50mm lens at times.

At a Grand Prix track for example, unless you have a press pass, you could be a considerable distance away from the action when a much longer focal length is needed, but then you need good light because of the compromise on maximum aperture with the zooms that go up to 500mm.

For me, the Sigma 70-200mm 1:2.8 EX DG HSM OS fits the bill, summer and winter. Our race meetings usually start at 7PM and in winter when the dim floodlights are already on. Weather sealing is not an issue for me but dust can be a problem because we get very little rain here. In 2 years we've had only 1 damp meeting from rain earlier in the day.

So, as always, it's horses for courses.

I use off-camera flash with diffuser x 2 or 3 and a light tent.

All you need is 2 or 3 small flashes (any make), desktop tripods, radio triggers (cactus 5 or similar), and a light tent of a suitable size.

My Flickr site shows loads of motorsport images, mostly taken with a Sigma 70-200 1:2.8 OS version (OS mode 2 for panning). The only other lens I use now is the DA* 50-135mm 1:2.8. I switched to the Sigma from a DA*60-250mm because with a max aperture of f4 I found it too slow for the often dim (after sunset in the winter)lighting conditions I'm shooting in. In good light the DA* 60-250mm is excellent though.

K-5 + DA* 50-135mm


K51_6944.jpg by Peter E Smith (AKA Mannesty), on Flickr

K-5 II + Sigma 70-200mm EX DG OS HSM



K52_3515.jpg by Peter E Smith (AKA Mannesty), on Flickr

K-5 + DA* 60-250mm



K51_7603.jpg by Peter E Smith (AKA Mannesty), on Flickr

Sounds like you have all the gear you need, it just needs to be in the right place at the right time.

If you are limited to only one hot shoe flash, some kind of wide angle diffuser might be an idea. Alternatively, if you are likely to be doing much of this type of work, consider a studio flash system.

I've made a relatively cheap portable system with 2 x stands, brollies, AF500FTZ flashes on brackets, and radio triggers. Cheap studio flash systems are also available if you don't mind mains and triggering cables across the floor.

PS, apart from the remaining bright spot in the top centre of the image, it has a magenta cast to it. Fluorescent lighting can be horrible to deal with because it changes intensity and colour slightly 50 times a second. Even if you used a grey card to set white balance, when you come to take the shot the WB and exposure may have changed.

Nicely done John, but boy did I read the topic title wrong the first time.

Understood Will. I have no knowledge of anything Nikon.

Perhaps then I should not have made the pairing of "decent" and "expensive" but my point is still valid, if a user doesn't put decent (not necessarily expensive) glass on a high end body, and/or the user has limited photographic skills, their images may well turn out to be disappointing.

The lens doesn't even come with caps for that money. What a chancer . . .

£10 says you don't sleep much tonight Vic.

NB: That wager is dependant on my winning the Euro Millions lottery tomorrow.

Would I be right in thinking that these are older primes that might have been very expensive in their day but can still produce quality results, rather than more modern spec. glass with modern coatings, stabilisation, etc.?

I'd have thought that anybody wanting to stump up for a Canon 6D is going to want, but not necessarily need, modern 'L' glass to go with it.