Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

How much of a focal length for skiing?

profile picture
lelandbroadhurst
Posts: 122 - Karma: 294
Ok, what do you guys think the narrowest focal length to use for shooting skiing is? Mostly park 60/40 jumps to rails. I'm using a crop sensor, but thinking of getting a 15-30 full frame lens which would be 22.5 at its widest... is that wide enough? What has your narrowest focal length been for skiing?
POLL
Edit Poll
Votes:

Take care when editing a poll; Options should be similar to maintain vote integrity.

More options will be added automatically as you type. You must supply a question and at least two options. No HTML is allowed.

Sep 30 2017 4:31PM
1 0
profile picture
creaturelo
Posts: 604 - Karma: 11,814
I use a 16-35 f/4 on a cropped sensor which has been just fine for what I do, but I tend to shoot a tighter frame with a longer lens than anything super wide.
Oct 1 2017 11:21AM
0 0
profile picture
Colby_eubanks
Posts: 72 - Karma: 647
14 for a crop sensor, 24 for full frame.
Oct 1 2017 11:35AM
0 0
profile picture
Sklar
Posts: 8864 - Karma: 31,612
I was stoked on my kit when I had a full frame body,
15 fish
17-40
100
70-200
Oct 1 2017 3:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Pataguccimane
Posts: 548 - Karma: 1,136
Assuming this is for follow camming? Tbh anything up to 35 would be sick, past that idk what would stabilize anything narrower. Other than that the sky’s the limit, if you’re set up with a tripod or somehow you can pull off a 70-200 on a glidecam like zac moxley you can go as narrow as you want.
Oct 2 2017 1:00AM
1 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61590 - Karma: 122,942
Photos or video?
Oct 2 2017 6:25PM
0 0
profile picture
lelandbroadhurst
Posts: 122 - Karma: 294
eheathPhotos or video?


Video.. right now looking at sigma ex 17-35 hsm dg lens. Full frame 17mm on dx body =25.5mm. Seems like that should be fine because 24mm on fx is considered pretty wide. Idk tho. also would it be worth the extra cash to get some type of image stabilization in the lens?
Oct 2 2017 8:53PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61590 - Karma: 122,942
lelandbroadhurstVideo.. right now looking at sigma ex 17-35 hsm dg lens. Full frame 17mm on dx body =25.5mm. Seems like that should be fine because 24mm on fx is considered pretty wide. Idk tho. also would it be worth the extra cash to get some type of image stabilization in the lens?


Nah dont worry about image stabilization

Check out the tokina 11-20
Oct 2 2017 10:43PM
1 0
profile picture
lelandbroadhurst
Posts: 122 - Karma: 294
eheathNah dont worry about image stabilization

Check out the tokina 11-20

Ok good to know. That particular tokina is sick! Although with the current eBay search is a bit out of budget... still can't land a job lol
Oct 3 2017 8:19AM
0 0
profile picture
CheddarJack
Posts: 5203 - Karma: 7,380
lelandbroadhurstOk good to know. That particular tokina is sick! Although with the current eBay search is a bit out of budget... still can't land a job lol


Go for the 11-16 then. It's a fantastic lens for the price. I love it for photos too.
Oct 10 2017 1:10AM
0 0
profile picture
ChoomaChad
Posts: 194 - Karma: 669
lelandbroadhurstOk good to know. That particular tokina is sick! Although with the current eBay search is a bit out of budget... still can't land a job lol


For the next ~80-ish hours the Tokina 12-28mm f/4 is on sale for $200 on BH. It's not as fast as the 11-20mm, but it's wide and cheap. I have the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 and love it. Plastic construction can be a bit of a downside but the optics are pretty stellar.
Oct 11 2017 2:21PM
1 0
All times are Eastern (-5)