- This topic is empty.
Sports lens?
-
Hi,
I am looking for a new lens for my Canon 450d for soccer photography. This will be used primarily for a soccer club web site!
Currently I am using an ef 100-300 f 4.5-5.6 but want to upgrade.
There are two I am looking at and can not decide which would be best, any help please!
#1 Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
#2 Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
While the 75-300 has IS and greater reach, the 70-200 is far better quality wise. Does anyone feel I should forego the extra reach and IS for the L series?
Hi
From my experience, sport photography is all about knowing the sport you want to photograph and speed, ie. fast camera , fast glass. Available light is one of the biggest problems for sports photographer in this part of the world, especially in winter.
I would recommend for starters the canon 70-200 IS f2.8 and a good monopod, if your budget can stretch to it… The lense’s is a little short, but I think the canon 450 has a 1.5 crop, if so you would be at 300mm or there abouts at the long end, and you can move around the pitch to get closer to the action.
cheersIf you can walk around the field as you wish and the games are in daylight then the 70-200 f4 is ideal for what you want. If they are only for website use anyway then the 70-300 would work fine as well as you won’t really notice any softness issues in lo res web images. Use a high ISO in poor daylight.
The 70-200 f4 however is a far superior lens and will help focussing as well as image quality.If you are going to be needing it under floodlights or dark conditions then forget about both and get yourself some kind on f2.8 lens. Sigma do a very good 70-200 f2.8 version which you could pick up for around €500 if you look around or you’ll get the older Canon 70-200 f2.8 non IS for around €750.
Ignore IS. You’ll almost never use it for sport. You should be using a high enough shutter speed not to need any IS at all (1/400 or faster). If needed, bump up your ISO.
With those in mind, either lens would be fine. The Canon 70-200mm f/4 is a beautiful lens, sharp and good focus. Well worth the extra cost.
Thank’s for your thoughts! From your comments I think the Canon sounds the best, cheer’s….
I have a Canon 75-300 and find its great unless you’re in the dugout or right beside the line, because when they come near the line too and you want a shot but you’ve no time to move the lens can sometimes completely disfocus. Not always but sometimes, even if they’re more than the required width away from you.
Looking at a pro at work a few weeks ago in Thomond park, he had what looked like a 400mm 2.8 prime on one camera, and a 70-200mm 2.8L on another camera. When the action was closed, he’d use the 70-200, and then the longer for the action in the far half of the field. I got myself a 40-200F4 (on this site actually) recently, and it’s VERY sharp. :)
Rgds,
Dave.A 300 – 400 would be needed, going by my old 100 – 300 lens, for decent shots in the other half of the field. I will be able to move where ever I want so I hope to get away with the 70 – 200….
Thanks for the tip on IS Paul, I have never had it & was tempted to get it.
If your lens doesn’t have the reach, then simply wait for the action to come to you.
At rugby I shoot with a 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4x TC (light permitting) and on the 2nd body I have the 70-200mm f/2.8. Most photographers at such events would either have a 300mm or 400mm lens (some shoot with 500mm f/4).
If I’m at an event and don’t have the reach (Croke Park or sometimes Aviva stadium), then I just wait until the action is within my reach. No point shooting at range and cropping an image to death.
Hi guys,
Just starting off in this addictive world of photography. I am using a EF-S 55-250mm IS lens on a Canon 550D. My primary use for the camera is Gaa matches and in 90% of the cases I have pitchside access so distance is not a major issue.
Just wondering would either of the lenses below be of any additional benefit to me or I continue to learn as I go with the EF-S 55-250mm IS lens.
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lens
Sigma AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro Canon Fit LensDont want to buy for the sake of buying but would be interested to know if the extra 50mm at this level of lenses would be worth it.
I think you’d be wasting money for the extra 50mm, unless you were selling that lens to fund it.
Just shoot within your range, until you want to buy big lenses.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
