Wade Thompson , Oct 28, 2009; 01:25 p.m.
I love sports photography...well MOST of it.
When the light is bad, I get really frustrated with it all.
Take last night for example: I'm shooting indoor volleyball at a high school with notoriously bad lighting.
My Nikon f/2.8 AF 80-200mm at 3200 ISO is not adequate. At least 2 feet of blurred arm movement. I currently use a fixed Nikon 50mm f/1.8 just to freeze the subject at 3200 ISO but the noise is just atrocious and trying to clean it up is almost a waste of time.
I am considering forking out $1100 on a AF 85mm f1.4 but don't want to be dissapointed again.
So, is it worth it to go from f1.8 to f1.4 (2/3 stops?)
I'm about ready to just tell them to take a hike unless I can use a flash in these poor lighting situation.
What do you think?
Here's an example of the "best" I could get from last night:
Derek Hofmann , Oct 28, 2009; 02:32 p.m.
What are you using to clean up the noise?
Is the image above resized down or is it a 1:1 crop?
Charles Beddoe 
, Oct 28, 2009; 02:33 p.m.
How about the 50mm f/1.4? A lot less money.
David Haas , Oct 28, 2009; 02:40 p.m.
Wade -
You didn't mention what body you're using ...D200, D300, D700 or something else....
My advice would be to go with the 50mm f1.4 if you find that focal length works for you. Only go with the 85 F1.4 if you're missing shots due to the Focal Length.
Depending on which body you have - I might even suggust an upgrade to one of the newer ones... D300,700, 90 all have good if not great high ISO performance.
Dave
Steve Hopkins 
, Oct 28, 2009; 03:05 p.m.
The 85 1.8 has been an often used lens for volleyball(indoor). The 1.4 lens, I've also read is a bit slowerlocjking in focus than the 1.8. so that is a dtraction. Also, the DOF shooting at 1.4 or 1.8 is very, very short. I think too short for fast action sports shooting.
I have a D300 and D300S and use the 85 1.8. I found shooting at f2.2 I was getting fewer sharp images than at 2.5 and 2.8. My shutter spd was 1/320 or 1/400 and ISO of 1250/1600. At 1600 I don't like the amount of noise on the 300 bodies, either one of them. Generally use manual setting as the light inside is 'relatively' constant brightness(or lack of!!). What shutter speed are you suing?
The 50mm lens is too short unless shooting about 10 feet from edge of court and trying to get shots of the girls on your side or middle. If you have 2 bodies, get the 85 1.8 for one body and use the 50 on other body. I might just try that tonight at a HS game. I have the 50 1.8 lens also. I have a few recent volleyball shots here on P.N, my code name: shoppix, and hundreds at ww.stevehopkinsphotography.com .
On flickr I came across some beautiful shots in "Volleyball" group by a guy whose initials I think are fmr or frm ??
He shoots with a 200 f.2 at f2.2 on a pro body. Go look at them and drool. That;'s all I can do since the lens is a $4800 pc of 'glass!! And, the Pro body, that's up there too!!
Hal B 
, Oct 28, 2009; 03:23 p.m.
Typical results for indoor volleyball are f/2 at ISO 1600 and shutter at 1/250 or 1/320. At ISO 3200, you should be able to use the f/2.8 lens. If the gym is really too dark for this, then it is probably inadequately lit even for effective volleyball. You might bring it up to the principal that the facility is too dimly lit and may be harmful to the girls' eyes.
If they won't replace the lights, I think it's up to you to provide strobes for your photos. Get approval to use battery-powered flash at the event.
John Vanacore , Oct 28, 2009; 04:36 p.m.
Wade,
I went thru the same thing as you. Using D300 was just too noisy, so i entered the world of the D700.
Was soo great, i got a 2nd one, and didn't look back.
I would suggest if you can swing it, go for one
No need for the 1.4 lenses...the 2.8's are fine...and in fact, you may not even have enough DoF witha 1.4
Wade Thompson , Oct 28, 2009; 04:44 p.m.
Great comments.
More info... using D200 here.. very noisy ISO 1600 and above but I can't stop the action in this gym at anything less than f1.8... my AF f2.8 makes unacceptably blurry pictures at the resulting shutter speed.
Software is "Paint Shop Pro X2"...for whatever that's worth.
At $2,800, I really can't justify that kind of expense to get to get the noise out... although the Ken Rockwell comparison of the D200 vs. D300 did show a big improvement at same ISO.
D300 at $1,800 is much more palatable.
So, overall you think it's my camera body and not my lens??
Elliot Bernstein 
, Oct 28, 2009; 08:40 p.m.
Try DXO software (they offer a 30 day free trial). It will breath new life into your ISO 1600 and even ISO 3200 images - a processed ISO 1600 image will look like it was shot at around ISO 400.
Chances are an f1.8 lens will meet your needs. If you are on a tight budget, the choice is easy. If you not, you certainly won't be disappointed with the f1.4 lens. Fortunately both give excellent results.
Ben Morrow , Oct 28, 2009; 11:12 p.m.
I would say it would be a better investment to spend money on a couple of Alien Bee 800 with 11" reflectors. You would get lower ISO photos, freeze action better and get better quality images. Look at this link and see how bounced strobes make for great photos.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=760051
