p.1 #1 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I’m inspired by, and envious of, the images being captured by the Canon EF/RF 400mm f/2.8 lenses in the hands of capable photographers. However, these lenses are out of my reach at the moment if I want to maintain the “happy wife, happy life” dynamic in my home.
I’ve invested in a good kit so far (Canon R3 + RF 70-200mm L IS USM Z + Canon RF 28-70 f/2) but am lacking a quality lens in the 400mm range. My 70-200mm does well for the high school wrestling and rodeo I primarily shoot, but I could use extra reach for fall football and some of the rodeo action that occurs on the far side of the arena. I just picked up the Canon RF 2x extender which I’ll try with my 70-200mm at a rodeo next week.
What telephoto lenses would you sports-oriented photographers recommend I consider? I’ve heard good things about the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM. I think the Canon EF 400 f/2.8 mkii will likely still be out of my price range. Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM is another potential option I’ve about.
p.1 #2 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
The Canon R3 with 70-200 Z and the 2X Tele may surprise you at 140-400mm. I just picked up the Z and a 2X to replace my 100-400 for night field sports. I have not used it at night yet, but it does look promising. I am using mine on an R6 vs R3, so you are in good shape.
p.1 #3 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
WsternLawmn wrote:
I’m inspired by, and envious of, the images being captured by the Canon EF/RF 400mm f/2.8 lenses in the hands of capable photographers. However, these lenses are out of my reach at the moment if I want to maintain the “happy wife, happy life” dynamic in my home.
I’ve invested in a good kit so far (Canon R3 + RF 70-200mm L IS USM Z + Canon RF 28-70 f/2) but am lacking a quality lens in the 400mm range. My 70-200mm does well for the high school wrestling and rodeo I primarily shoot, but I could use extra reach for fall football and some of the rodeo action that occurs on the far side of the arena. I just picked up the Canon RF 2x extender which I’ll try with my 70-200mm at a rodeo next week.
What telephoto lenses would you sports-oriented photographers recommend I consider? I’ve heard good things about the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM. I think the Canon EF 400 f/2.8 mkii will likely still be out of my price range. Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Super Telephoto Lens is another potential option I’ve about.
I think the 100-500 might be your best bet. In this segment I think canon is behind sony and Nikon. The 200-600 by sony and Nikon 180-600 are much better for sports because they're internal zoom. The 100-500 have a rather long throw in comparison. But I think you don't have much other choice other than the 100-500
p.1 #4 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
You’ll have to let me know what your real world experience finds out with the 2x extender. I’ve read the RF 2x, especially paired with the RF 70-200 f/2.8 Z, holds up well compared to the EF version. I’ll find out during daylight rodeo in the next couple of weeks.
Ray Swindle wrote:
The Canon R3 with 70-200 Z and the 2X Tele may surprise you at 140-400mm. I just picked up the Z and a 2X to replace my 100-400 for night field sports. I have not used it at night yet, but it does look promising. I am using mine on an R6 vs R3, so you are in good shape.
p.1 #5 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
An "outsider's (non-Canon) perspective."
I shoot Nikon and own a 400MM 2.8 -- and also a 400MM 4.5.
If it's daytime and I'm shooting tight on an isolated subject - and I think you are most times with a 400 - non pixel-peepers would be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two lenses. Visually, you are going to get ~70-80% of that 2.8 compression look at a fraction of the price. And using a 4.5 over the course of a long event is a lot easier on the bones than a 2.8.
I have the 2.8 because it also has a built-in TC, and that's a game changer for the type of work I do. But with our ability to mitigate noise with new software and better cameras I think for most people, the f4 family is a sensational option.
The best thing you can do is make a minor investment and rent one and try to out. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Jared Polin did a 400 2.8 vs 400 4.5 comparison at a baseball game and I know the canon is a straight up f4 -- even better. take a look at minute marker 10:30.&t=712s
p.1 #6 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I never liked the reduced IQ from a 2x TC. 1.4 TCs on the other hand generally hold up. The issue with sports starts with the need for sufficient light. While many lenses will do fine during daytime, it's a whole other world when the light leaves. Even ƒ4 lenses on a poorly lit high school football field at night will struggle with fast AF acquisition not too mention the very high ISO required to keep the shutter above 1/1000 sec. Add to it any need to heavily crop and the IQ can degrade rapidly. Under those conditions is why fast glass is so important i.e. ƒ2.8 or better. During the summer months the sun is out longer so ƒ4-6.5 glass can work even with subpar field lighting but starting in mid to late September it becomes more of a challenge. Personally I would look for a used ver II of the Canon 400 2.8 and marry that with a second body plus the 70-200 which makes a very good sports rig. You might consider renting the Canon 100-500 to try it out in low light conditions to see if it will perform well enough. Assuming your rodeo work is outdoors but if it's indoors that might be a good test.
p.1 #7 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
If you don't mind the extra weight, just buy a gen 1 IS 400 f2.8 or 500 f4. They'll work a treat on the R3 with the EF-RF adapter. Probably cheaper than a lot of the RF zoom options, too. If you don't mind brassing on the lens the price comes down even more.
p.1 #8 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I agree with Cocodrillo that a IS I 400 may be your best bet. I know some shoot sports with the 100-500 but I do not see many and the couple I know went back to their f2.8 300 or 400. I think a 200-400 just sold on the board for 3200 and you see them sometimes close to 3000. Aside from the 100-500 your other choices are going to require, for most people, a monopod and once you are lugging a body and lens on a monopod the weight matters a little less. I see more Sigma zooms on the sidelines than the 100-500 and they appear to make decent images. Your best bet for the unique look of a 400 is an older 400. What do they say "cry once, buy once".
p.1 #9 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
Thanks for all the input everyone—some solid advice. I’m leaning toward saving up for an EF 400 f/2.8, maybe IS MII. There is just something about the look…I’ll be holding a car wash and bake sale next week for anyone who wants to contribute, lol!
p.1 #10 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
First off, your wife would tell you I was a bad influence and should not listen to anything I told you.
But...my take is different than most since this is my chosen profession and the proper camera gear is what is necessary for me to do my job.
There are 3 lenses I use on a regular basis that could fill your needs. I am a Nikon user but shot Canon for years and the lenses I will talk about are excellent on Canon DSLR or mirrorless cameras.
Sigma 120-300 f2.8
I shot rodeo for years and the Sigma 120-300 served me well with a perfect range for nearly all events ( especially barrels and bulls) and is also excellent for wrestling and softball. It is also great for volleyball but it is too short for football, baseball and soccer.
Nikon 200-400
I started using this lens for rodeo and daytime sports and the zoom range is perfect for most subjects and, under some lighting conditions, found that the f4 aperture allowed me to use it at night and indoors.
There are some fields and gyms/arenas bright enough that f4 is not limiting but most require f/2.8 and some I still have no choice but to use the 200 f/2.
400 f2.8
I probably use this lens more than any since much of my work is under the lights or indoors...whether it be football, soccer, motorcycle ice racing, bowling, volleyball or night baseball.
I do not have the option to pick my assignments and choose when and where or the lighting conditions so the 400 f2.8 is my most valuable lens.
It is big, heavy and expensive but it has never failed me.
All of my camera gear is tax deductible so, within reason, price is not an obstacle and my clients expect me to produce images without excuses so I can understand those who are on a budget, are part time or pure hobbyists.
Daytime rodeos and fixed aperture zoom lenses are meant for each other but football and soccer, under the lights, is a whole different ball game so balancing which sport creates more income vs. cost of equipment must be considered.
I have used a 400 f2.8 for calf roping, team roping and steer wrestling and even bulls, at the other end of a full sized rodeo arena and, if positioned carefully for barrels and poles.
To keep peace in your family, I would consider the 120-300 or the 200-400 to give you more range for rodeos and wrestling but, if you find clients are demanding your services for high school football, under the lights, the 400 f/2.8 is the only option.
I have included a few examples with shooting data.
p.1 #12 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
Thanks for the comprehensive, excellent reply. I appreciate the amount of time and thought you put into it including the examples and detailed information—very helpful.
I love my 70-200 f/2.8 but it definitely does not have the reach I’m looking for during football games or across the rodeo arena when repositioning and getting closer isn’t an option.
I’m at a point in my life where the “buy once, cry once” saying resonates with me and gear that doesn’t fully meet my needs and expectations frustrates me. However, I’m in a catch-22 in that I am not a full time professional photographer, making it harder to readily justify another even bigger expenditure for a 400 mm f/2.8, though that lens would take my work to the next level. But my photography won’t yet pay for it. I think this may be a sign it’s time to step up my “pro-enthusiast” level work and get more serious about building a business once I figure out the next steps. (We live in a Northern California county that is somewhat isolated with a smaller population base and fewer opportunities (no major cities) though we have two colleges.) An intermediate zoom option like you presented may represent a way to fill the gap for now but I have my eye on that 400mm fixed lens.
Your example photos are excellent quality and reflect your skills. Thanks again for taking the time to respond to my inquiry in such a thoughtful manner.
p.1 #13 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I don't know what Canon offers in this focal length but I purchased this Nikkor 180-600 mainly for wildlife photography but used for a few sports assignments and found it to be an excellent lens.
For daytime sports, this may be an option, especially rodeo or horse shows.
Now...you don't get the background blur or ultimate sharpness of a true telephoto but that zoom range is hard to overlook...especially 600 mm.
Now...will I use this lens for night football or soccer...no way...but for a day football or soccer match...I am bringing it.
p.1 #14 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
Steve:
The 400 f2.8 lens can create business by the images it is capable of producing...especially for night football and other sports that require a long lens in, less than ideal, lighting conditions.
However...that is a big step financially but...the extra income it can produce...well that is a different subject to discuss with the Mrs.
p.1 #18 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I don't have any statistics to prove my point but my anecdotal evidence, supported by my observations of the sports photographers around me, suggests that very few of the people that own a 400 pay for it with work they produce from it. I know of four owners that shoot college football where I do that make nothing from them. They just enjoy using the long lens for the reach and image it will produce pretty consistently. Most long lenses can be sold for a discount on resale. I picked up a used 400 IS II for about $6000 three or four years ago and sold it in the last several months for just under $5000. So, let's call it three years and it averages out to about $350 of depreciation each year plus the lost interest on the investment in it which is not a small amount either. For most folks it's an expensive hobby that for most doesn't produce enough income to offset the cost. A small percentage of sports shooters make a living at it, and another small percentage make a small amount as a side hustle or something in addition to a good full time job. I can afford nice lenses and bodies and at this stage don't want to wish that I had bought better gear. Few value the investment of their time and for most the time value of their investment outweighs the cost of the gear. They just don't factor it in. I don't want to take a set of images with a Tamron or Sigma super zoom and wish that I had used the 400 f2.8. I understand that some produce very nice images with those lens but you get the point.
p.1 #19 · Recommended 400-500mm Telephoto Lenses for Sports Photography
I have an embarrassing story to tell. During Covid I sold my old Canon DSLR set up and invested in an R5 and a number of lenses. We went to Yellowstone in May 2021 and I saw a few wildlife shooters using the Canon 400, 2.8. Envious, I got back to MD, raided my secret slush fund and ordered the 400 through BestBuy in Delaware. There is no sales tax in DE, which cut $720 or so off the total price. So they called when it came to the store, and I made the 2 hour drive from MD to pick it up. Gorgeous lens, but it has sat in the case since I bought it. Unused. I just can't get inspired around Gaithersburg.
