Sports lenses.

Status
Not open for further replies.
MalmöMakem

MalmöMakem

Midfield
As i've now got my canon 7d up and running i need to get myself a sports lens.

Not sure if people on here will have had much dealings with sport related lenses but I've got a few options to have a look at.

The ones within my price range so far are;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00005QF6T/ref=asc_df_B00005QF6T8917730?smid=A3CCL2LRPH3UU&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22242&creativeASIN=B00005QF6T

then the newer version of that lens

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-70-200mm-4-0-USM-Lens/dp/B000I2J2SG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1343254371&sr=8-2

Ive also had a look at the sigma 70-300mm
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-equipment/used-lenses/used-canon-fit-lenses/sigma-100-300mm-f/4-ex-apo-if-hsm,-canon-ef-fit-2/

Just wondered if people had any advice to give. I'd of gone for the 2.8 in the canon lens but its a little out of my price range. Got a bit of paid work now with sports photography including local press as well as going to london for a replay of the first ever fa cup final against wanderers fc and royal engineers.

Open to other lenses. Looking at a price range of 500 up to about 800.
 


the 70-200 f/4.0 would be a good start, L quality glass for < 500 and a decent range. Utterly useless indoor mind..

Pretty light weight aswell, and looks the part..

edit: just looked at your links.. aye, 70-200 is very good, cheaper @ procamerashop, but £40 cashback is available from Amazon iirc - you'll have to check.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ayesane said:
the 70-200 f/4.0 would be a good start, L quality glass for < 500 and a decent range. Utterly useless indoor mind..

Pretty light weight aswell, and looks the part..

edit: just looked at your links.. aye, 70-200 is very good, cheaper @ procamerashop, but £40 cashback is available from Amazon iirc - you'll have to check.
Click to expand...

is there a huge difference between one having IS and other not? It'll basically be set on a monopod at games. Not planning on using it indoors. My 28-75 will do for now.
 
If you can push to the £900ish mark I would recommend the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8. Recently sold mine, as I gave up on motorsports but it's probably one of the best lenses I have owned. It was lightening fast focusing when I used it on my 1D3, and it will be as good if not better on the 7D. They are quite heavy so definitely need to be perched on a monopod. Image quality is very, very good even with a 1.4 extender attached.

My brother still has one, but as he is after a carbon fibre road bike, I think it may end up for sale soon as it's sat unused for quite a while.

I personally think if your at a game with poor light an F4 may struggle without using a high ISO. Even when using a 2.8 lens on an overcast day, I have had to ramp the ISO to over 2000, to get a shutter speed of 1/250. For football your going to want a higher shutter speed to freeze the action so may have to work with an even higher ISO setting.

The £900 mark should get you a good used copy. I sold mine for £950 and it was mint.
 
My Left Foot said:
If you can push to the £900ish mark I would recommend the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8. Recently sold mine, as I gave up on motorsports but it's probably one of the best lenses I have owned. It was lightening fast focusing when I used it on my 1D3, and it will be as good if not better on the 7D. They are quite heavy so definitely need to be perched on a monopod. Image quality is very, very good even with a 1.4 extender attached.

My brother still has one, but as he is after a carbon fibre road bike, I think it may end up for sale soon as it's sat unused for quite a while.

I personally think if your at a game with poor light an F4 may struggle without using a high ISO. Even when using a 2.8 lens on an overcast day, I have had to ramp the ISO to over 2000, to get a shutter speed of 1/250. For football your going to want a higher shutter speed to freeze the action so may have to work with an even higher ISO setting.

The £900 mark should get you a good used copy. I sold mine for £950 and it was mint.
Click to expand...

did have a quick look at that lens. Seem to be seeing a lot of people saying it gets really soft at 300mm.

Even with the cheaper f4 canons i'll notice a difference. I was using a tamron 70-150 that was dirt cheap and it did an alright job.

Id even be tempted to go for something that is a prime lens if it means faster speed and works great in any light as I've got my pentax with a 1.8 50mm for close ups.

I can pick up the older 2.8 70-200 canon without IS for 800. So might go for that. But perhaps play it safe and just get the f4 and then upgrade at a later date
 
**Narrowed it down to

Canon 70-200mm f4 L USM lens. Can get it second hand for 400 (retails at over 500)

or

Canon 200m f2.8. Can get this for 500.

Both got their good points but its a choice between the 2.8 and 4 stops or the versatility of the 70-200

Also picking up a 2x extender. Not paying 300 for the canon ones so going for the highly rated Sigma.
 
MalmöMakem said:
**Narrowed it down to

Canon 70-200mm f4 L USM lens. Can get it second hand for 400 (retails at over 500)

or

Canon 200m f2.8. Can get this for 500.

Both got their good points but its a choice between the 2.8 and 4 stops or the versatility of the 70-200

Also picking up a 2x extender. Not paying 300 for the canon ones so going for the highly rated Sigma.
Click to expand...

Not thought about a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8? I have had one in the past and they are a good option. It worked well with a 1.4x tc but as with the Canon the images tend to be soft with a 2x tc. A 70-200 f4 will be far too slow with a 2x tc, in poor light, for what you want to use it for IMO.
 
My Left Foot said:
Not thought about a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8? I have had one in the past and they are a good option. It worked well with a 1.4x tc but as with the Canon the images tend to be soft with a 2x tc. A 70-200 f4 will be far too slow with a 2x tc, in poor light, for what you want to use it for IMO.
Click to expand...

did have a look, but for the price of that id of just got the 2.8 canon and its a little too pricey currently.
 
Hate buying new lenses. can never decided! :lol:

was reading up about the sigma and majority say if price is an issue then its a good option, but at the same time its always a good idea to with the canon, especially if its an L lens
 
MalmöMakem said:
Hate buying new lenses. can never decided! :lol:

was reading up about the sigma and majority say if price is an issue then its a good option, but at the same time its always a good idea to with the canon, especially if its an L lens
Click to expand...

Its an absolute minefield :lol:

People always say the same things... if you're on a budget then this is good, but if you can save a bit more, then this is great!!!

Total headache :evil:
 
MalmöMakem said:
Hate buying new lenses. can never decided! :lol:

was reading up about the sigma and majority say if price is an issue then its a good option, but at the same time its always a good idea to with the canon, especially if its an L lens
Click to expand...

For sports stuff you do the 70-200 f4 will be useless as my left foot has said. I have this lens, it has it's uses but not the best. I never use it at the shutter speeds you would have to use as well. If you can I would stretch to the 2.8
 
sketchy said:
For sports stuff you do the 70-200 f4 will be useless as my left foot has said. I have this lens, it has it's uses but not the best. I never use it at the shutter speeds you would have to use as well. If you can I would stretch to the 2.8
Click to expand...

:evil: see post 10
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top