Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature

  
 
ChipinSD
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Hello,

I am looking for advice from sports photographers on a lens swap. Here is the main gear I have for outdoor sports:

Canon 7D
Canon 70-200 F2.8 (non-IS)
Canon 300mm F4 IS
Canon 1.4x extender

I am shooting baseball, soccer, and football, but also want to do more wildlife/birds and landscape. I find that I rarely use the 300 F4 due to its lack of zoom or the extender. Yet there are times I would like more reach than the 200mm. My thinking is I should sell the 300 and buy something that is more useful to me.

Last week I went to an NFL game and rather than use the 70-200 I pulled out my ancient Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM. I found I really appreciated the extra 100mm on the long end. What I didn't like was the IQ from this old, entry-level zoom. Also the slow lens forced me to crank up ISO to 1,000+ at night.

I looked at the reviews for Canon zooms and identified a few possible alternatives. I would love feedback from FMers on these choices. I know I can rent these to try it out, so if we can narrow the list to two I can go that route. I am hoping I can get around $1,000 for my mint 300 F4 (with box).

Here are the lenses I am thinking of.

Option 1: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
Dec 2010, 9.5 Overall rating
New = $1,400 B&H after rebate
2.3 pounds, 5.6" long

What I like is that it has IS, is a relatively new model, is under 8" so I can bring it into an NFL stadium and covers the full range of zoom I would want. The downside is how slow it is - will AF be quick on a 7D? Will I see a huge difference in IQ over my 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM? Not sure how it is with manual focus either.

Option 2: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
March 2003, 9.1 overall rating
New = $1,500 B&H after rebate
3 pounds, 7" long
Has older IS, even longer reach but again is slow at full zoom.

Option 3: Canon EF 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USM
March 2003, 8.7 Overall
New = $2,500 B&H
3.7 pounds, 7.2" long
This is of lower interest, it is much more money than Options 1 and 2, I don't need anything under 100mm for what I am using this for. For all that money there is no IS.

Option 4: Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
August 2004, 9.1 Overall
New = $2,500 B&H
3.7 pounds, 7.2" long
Similar to Option 3, but with IS. Still paying for something I don't need (the under 100 mm).

Option 5: Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 EX APO DG OS HSM For Canon
Saw this for $2,400 from Abe's. I hesitate to consider non-Canon not because I am a snob, but because I have a Tamron that is too slow in AF to be of much use. Spec wise, this sounds perfect - I would have F2.8 as well as OS technology. The cost is a bit of a stretch, but of this lens is amazing I can swing it. I can probably sell my 1.4x extender too. The big question is how is this lens in AF speed, build quality and IQ. It is also 11" long - so I may not be able to bring it to NFL games (they say the lens must be under 8").

Option 6 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Sept 2005, 8.9 Overall rating
New = $650 B&H
This is a much smaller non-L version that would be an upgrade of the lens I used last weekend. It is light, small, inexpensive, has IS - but will it perform anywhere near Options 1 and 2.

Thanks for reading my long post. Any comments are greatly appreciated!

Chip



Oct 21, 2013 at 01:06 AM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Given you throw birding and wildlife into the mix, to me it's either the Canon 100-400L or Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. 300mm is too short IMO in general even with a 7D and you'll always be at 400mm most of the times for birds especially. The Simga has appeal since it's f/2.8 so great for sports where lihgts not so good and also better subject isolation and background blur. Additionally it'll take up to a 2x converter and still allow AF on your 7D. But is is a beast of a lens at ~3kg. 100-400L is next best option, but f/5.6 can be slow for the sports and for fast action it's AF is not fastest, but it's still pretty good.

I'd rule out ny of the 7x-300mm options as they all have slow f/5.6 apertures and lack the reach you'll want for wildlife for the most part.

Best option but most expensive is the 300 f/2.8L IS mk I which can be found for around $3.5K, best AF, best IQ and takes 1.4x and 2x TC's very well.



Oct 21, 2013 at 01:14 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Honestly I'd stick with the 300 f/4 IS (plus the 1.4x TC for wildlife). I prefer the 300 prime for football and soccer.



Oct 21, 2013 at 02:10 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


No way in the world would I got for 3,4,6 for a mix of soccer, football and wildlife. Heck if you had 3,4 or 6 I'd recommend you to go to a lens you have .



Oct 21, 2013 at 02:11 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


If you do make a change then #5 is easily the best change to make (will need to buy TCs though for wildlife) and just about the only one that even makes remote sense (maybe the 100-400L but I'd rather stick with the 300 f/4 and TC). Assuming you are fine with lugging that around for all the wildlife stuff. It is heavy and it's even worse in that regard than the 300 2.8 IS.


Edited on Oct 21, 2013 at 01:11 PM · View previous versions



Oct 21, 2013 at 02:13 AM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


I'm afraid you are demanding too much from a single lens solution. You're saying you're photographying outdoor sports. Anything that happens on a lagre field (like football or soccer), you'll be needing a lens that goes to at least 300mm, unless the action gets close, say 15 meters or closer (you have a 70-200mm for that). You also want to shoot at night (I assume) and for that the slowest manageable aperture is f4. And you also want do do wildlife, where absolute minimum focal length (again, unless you can get really close) is 400mm. And, you don't like 3rd party lenses too much. Therefore, the absolutely optimal solution for your needs is Canon 200-400L. Otherwise, the Sigma 120-300 should do nicely, but don't forget the Sigma isn't really a 300mm lens, more like 275 - 280mm.


Oct 21, 2013 at 05:06 AM
jpeter
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


I would not be eager to trade any of those combos for what you have, unless your 300 is some kind of a bad copy. If any, the 100-400 ...

Another thought is to save up your money and get a longer prime if wildlife photo's are a major consideration.

JP



Oct 21, 2013 at 06:35 AM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


I'd save up for a while longer so you can get the EX 120-300/2.8 OS (not "S"), and also keep your 70-200/2.8L and 1.4x Extender. I've owned the first two versions of this EX lens, and they're very nice. I sold my last one to get an EF 300/2.8L IS, which is better in many ways, but not as flexible for field sports.

You can get the EX 120-300 OS for $1800 to $2100, depending on condition [E] to [M-]. $2400 is a bit too expensive, unless it has a warranty.

You probably won't get the EX 120-300/2.8 or any lenses of similar size into an NFL game. (I assume you aren't on the sidelines.)



Oct 21, 2013 at 07:09 AM
gocolts
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


jcolwell wrote:
I'd save up for a while longer so you can get the EX 120-300/2.8 OS (not "S"), and also keep your 70-200/2.8L and 1.4x Extender. I've owned the first two versions of this EX lens, and they're very nice. I sold my last one to get an EF 300/2.8L IS, which is better in many ways, but not as flexible for field sports.

You can get the EX 120-300 OS for $1800 to $2100, depending on condition [E] to [M-]. $2400 is a bit too expensive, unless it has a warranty.

You probably won't get the EX 120-300/2.8 or any lenses of
...Show more


Agree with this. On the NFL games...I'm a Colts season ticket holder, and their max lens length is 6 inches...which is exactly what my 70-300L measures... If they allowed 8 inches and you find you use the lens a lot at games and need the reach, the 100-400 might be for you, but it's tough to beat the flexibility of the 120-300 OS, especially with teleconverters mixed in. I used to have one, and still would if it wasn't for a great deal I got on a 400 DO, which I find complements my 70-300L very well for a 2-lens racetrack/zoo combo.



Oct 21, 2013 at 09:07 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Milan Hutera wrote:
Therefore, the absolutely optimal solution for your needs is Canon 200-400L.


Considering he said $2400 is a stretch, that is a ridiculous suggestion.



Oct 21, 2013 at 11:53 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Pixel Perfect wrote
Best option but most expensive is the 300 f/2.8L IS mk I which can be found for around $3.5K, best AF, best IQ and takes 1.4x and 2x TC's very well.


Does not meet his criteria: is under 8" so I can bring it into an NFL stadium



Oct 21, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Of the 6 options you give, the 100-400 is the only one with that focal-length range without using TC's.

Do you want to be fumbling around with TC's during a football game



Oct 21, 2013 at 11:59 AM
gocolts
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Or you can go the opposite at an NFL game and go wiiiide.









Oct 21, 2013 at 12:38 PM
timbop
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Imagemaster wrote:
Of the 6 options you give, the 100-400 is the only one with that focal-length range without using TC's.

Do you want to be fumbling around with TC's during a football game


exactly - the 100-400 meets the criteria for length to get in, and ability to take meaningful pictures. All the options except the sigma are 5.6, so I don't see why you'd opt for a 70-300 when you can get an extra 100mm. No way you get the sigma in the door, so it doesn't matter how good it is.



Oct 21, 2013 at 12:42 PM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Sure,but it's the only lens that meets his criteria.

Imagemaster wrote:
Considering he said $2400 is a stretch, that is a ridiculous suggestion.




Oct 21, 2013 at 12:45 PM
timbop
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


Milan Hutera wrote:
Sure,but it's the only lens that meets his criteria.



<sarcasm>
No, the best option is for him to get hired as a shooter on the sidelines and then he can be there with a 400/2.8 on one body, a 70-200/2.8 on a second, and a wide angle on the third.
</sarcasm>

The only practical solution is a lens he can afford that is less than 8"; having to shoot at 5.6 is an unavoidable reality- he'll have to just live with the noisy higher ISO.

Edited on Oct 22, 2013 at 12:14 PM · View previous versions



Oct 21, 2013 at 12:49 PM
timbop
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


gocolts wrote:
Or you can go the opposite at an NFL game and go wiiiide.



Sure, but that isn't going to get him too many action shots....



Oct 21, 2013 at 12:51 PM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


timbop wrote:
No, the best option is for him to get hired as a shooter on the sidelines and then he can be there with a 400/2.8 on one body, a 70-200/2.8 on a second, and a wide angle on the third.

The only practical solution is a lens he can afford that is less than 8"; having to shoot at 5.6 is an unavoidable reality- he'll have to just live with the noisy higher ISO.


The OP doesn't have 2nd or 3rd body, or 400 f2,8 for that matter. The point of my original post was to put things in perspective. There's no such thing as fast, long zoom that's also cheap.



Oct 21, 2013 at 12:55 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


just noticed that it sounds like you are maybe shooting sports from the stands more than the sidelines??

in this case I don't see how the sigma could work, many NFL stadiums only allow tiny lenses in, MLB often allows big ones so 300 f/4 and 100-400 work.

if this is the case, AF speed matters much less, f-stop doesn't matter so much either (unless you were to insist on only attending night games)

reach matters a real lot



Oct 21, 2013 at 01:14 PM
gocolts
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Help Selecting Long Zoom for Sports/Nature


timbop wrote:
Sure, but that isn't going to get him too many action shots....


Of course not, it was a joke. The reality is that unless you're in the lower level, it's hard to get good shots anyways. I'm actually going to be sitting down fairly close for a game in December, I think I'm going to take my 7D/70-300L combo and get a few shots. As others have discussed, f/5.6 isn't optimal, but considering the other options when factoring in size and price, I think you just hope that between modern camera ISO's and the lighting at NFL games being really good, you can get by with a slow lens that's of allowable size and focal length.

All that said, I think if I were in the OP's shoes, I'd pick up a used 100-400L, try it for awhile, and if you don't like it, sell it on for little loss if you buy it right and take care of it.



Oct 21, 2013 at 01:21 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.