p.1 #1 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I'm looking to pick up a lens to shoot my kids' soccer games. Most games are during the day, and I only plan on bringing the camera when the weather is nice. I'd prefer something relatively inconspicuous as I don't want to stress the kids out or draw too much attention on the sidelines 😅
I’m shooting with an R6mkii, and I’d prefer to go RF, but I do have the EF-RF adapter and I’m open to EF glass if it makes a strong case in terms of performance or value. Budget is around $1K, but I can be flexible—especially if the lens could serve other purposes too (e.g. travel, general tele use, etc.).
Right now I’m torn between:
RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 – Seems great for reach, lightweight, and very discrete. The only thing that gives me pause is the f/8 on the long end—I'm wondering if that’ll be too limiting even in good light.
RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM in crop mode – Shorter reach, but faster aperture and potentially better subject separation? I'm curious if shooting in crop mode effectively gives me better images saving 2 iso stops when compared to the 100-400. The 70-200/4 could also be used for general tele uses.
I’ve also considered EF options like EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II or even EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II/III if shooting in crop mode is a good approach. But ideally I’d like something black and relatively discrete which makes the RF 100-400 tempting. But I keep wondering if I’ll regret not having a faster aperture for better light and separation.
Would love to hear your thoughts—especially from anyone who's used these lenses for youth sports.
p.1 #2 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I shot pics at quite a few kids soccer games. 1st grade through high school. The rf 100400 is very sharp and lightweight. I rarely use mine because the af isnt great. Its my take on vacation lens. My everyday tele is ef100400v2. Great lens but not what i ended up using most games. You might find 70200 more usefull for kids soccer or even wider. Jp
p.1 #3 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
If you don't have one already, everyone should get a 70-200mm. It's a very useful general purpose telephoto range and the one lens I don't think I'd want to be without.
But for soccer I think the 100-400mm is the best focal range. The distances involved suggest having something 300mm and above, from my experience.
p.1 #5 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
The RF 100-400 probably best fits with your budget and desire to be relatively inconspicuous. Probably any other suitable option would be a white Canon or a pretty large lens in black of a third party.
3rd party Sigma (150-600, 60-600, 120-300 2nd hand) or Tamron (150-600) would be pretty big, but black. Sigma and Tamron also make 100-400 lenses, but the aperture advantage over the RF 100-400 I think is not worth it over using the native RF mount.
The R6ii does pretty good on high ISO, so the slower aperture is mostly relevant with respect to subject separation. I don't think you will see a significant difference between f5.6 and f8.
The 70-200's are white around your budget, so will be noted (The RF 70-200 Z is available in black, but large and far beyond budget). As long as you can move the side lines and they do not play at the full-sized pitches, the range should suffice to get great shots.
Also Sigma and Tamron made EF versions of 70-200 f2.8 in black, which might be a bit more affordable and less conspicuous than the white Canon versions.
Since you are starting out I think the RF 100-400 if you really need the reach or a Sigma EF 70-200 f2.8 Sports version, would be suitable options. I've used the 'sports' version of that lens on my R cameras for rugby and they worked properly (never noticed AF pulsing which some Sigma lenses are reported to have on R cameras).
I have a RF 100-400 and I think it is a nice lens. I used it once on a R6 mark 1 for a rugby match that I expected to be played at more daylight and I did want to carry heavy and expensive gear to that occasion. Despite the dim lighting conditions, I got acceptable results after 'noise reduction' with DXO. So it should suffice in most of your shooting.
Overall, the advice I hear most often regarding sports lenses is to get a 70-200 f2.8 first and I totally get why that is the case and think it would be my advice as well. If my equipment got lost and I had to start over, with the knowledge I have now, I would start with the 70-200 f2.8 myself.
If budget is available it is a solid choice. A 70-200 f2.8 gives great images when action is nearby and can be used when matches are played in dim light or under flood lights to still deliver great results (with limited need for noise reduction).
Maybe a second hand 70-200 from Sigma or Tamron can be combined with a RF 100-400 around your budget, but that is depending on your local second hand options. (Be aware that there are older 'non sports' versions of the sigma and probably older versions of the Tamrons around, so check compatibility if you tend to go that route).
p.1 #6 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
-- in reply to crop mode question --
That largely depends on what you want with the photos. With crop mode you loose quite a bit of the 24Mp's of the R6 mark ii.
So the ability to print big gets reduced. But for viewing on regular computers or even smaller screens on mobile, the crop mode will give sufficient resolution.
As a side note, I myself would not use crop mode in camera, but crop the photos in post processing. As far as I know that does not have any difference in image quality. It does however require more time afterwards, so in camera crop can be less demanding on your time. (I crop almost every sports photo, so that is why I prefer to do it all in post).
Opinions on image quality between cropping in camera or cropping in post processing vary, so I won't claim my opinion on this is 'right' , it is however my experience based on limited testing.
p.1 #7 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I have a Tamron EF 18-400 that was originally bought for field games like soccer and foot ball. It's been years since I've used it for that, but it's been my main lens for use whenever doing most out of the studio shoots since I bought it. Though I sometimes wished I had more lens than this when shooting action at the very far end of the field, this one lens has been a favorite and usually the only lens that I've taken with me when shooting away from my studio ever since I bought it. Why carry several lenses and several cameras when you can have one lens on one camera for both near and far shots.
p.1 #8 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I just went through this a few months back. I also have the R6m2 and I use the following lenses with it for soccer.
EF-70-200mm f/2.8ii - This lens works very well for soccer near the goal. For young kids, like mid field to the goal. It is fast and the f/2.8 gives great subject separation. It is a very versatile lens as well, I have used it for indoor soccer, baseball, indoor wrestling, tennis, indoor basketball and dance recitals.
RF- 100-400mm - Very light weight and good reach. I have only used it outdoors for soccer and the photos had a "busy" background. It wasn't as appealing at the 70-200mm f/2.8. At a lot of youth soccer games you will see the fans on the sidelines in your photos, where the f/2.8 will do a better job blurring them out. I also used some noise reduction with this lens if I tried to crop the photo for the 2 times I used it for that. I have used this lens for wildlife and at an airshow and was much more impressed. The f/8 was fine for freezing the action but I would compare it to more of a snapshot type of photo for sports. I bought mine refurb from Canon for $399.
EF-300mm f/2.8ii - My experience with the RF 100-400 led me to this purchase. It took me awhile to save up for this one, but I have really enjoyed using it. It is big, and people will stare but it takes extenders well and the images are very sharp. I know this isn't what you are looking for, but just sharing my experiences....
I would recommend the 70-200mm f/2.8. It will work great with your R6m2 and give you great looking photos of your kids playing soccer and anything else they do. An EF version 2 would be under $1k.
p.1 #9 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
is a 70-200 in crop mode good enough?
No. I've been using the EF 100-400 II for soccer for years. Even 400mm is only good for about half the field, but it's way more useful than 200mm if you're only going to carry one camera. 400 @ f/5.6 isn't going to give you great background separation (you really want a 400/2.8 for that) but it can be done if you're selective about what shots you take with respect to camera/subject/background distances.
Aug 07, 2025 at 10:25 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #10 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
I'm looking to pick up a lens to shoot my kids' soccer games. Most games are during the day, and I only plan on bringing the camera when the weather is nice. I'd prefer something relatively inconspicuous as I don't want to stress the kids out or draw too much attention on the sidelines 😅
I’m shooting with an R6mkii, and I’d prefer to go RF, but I do have the EF-RF adapter and I’m open to EF glass if it makes a strong case in terms of performance or value. Budget is around $1K, but I can be flexible—especially if the lens could serve other purposes too (e.g. travel, general tele use, etc.).
Right now I’m torn between:
RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 – Seems great for reach, lightweight, and very discrete. The only thing that gives me pause is the f/8 on the long end—I'm wondering if that’ll be too limiting even in good light.
RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM in crop mode – Shorter reach, but faster aperture and potentially better subject separation? I'm curious if shooting in crop mode effectively gives me better images saving 2 iso stops when compared to the 100-400. The 70-200/4 could also be used for general tele uses.
I’ve also considered EF options like EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II or even EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II/III if shooting in crop mode is a good approach. But ideally I’d like something black and relatively discrete which makes the RF 100-400 tempting. But I keep wondering if I’ll regret not having a faster aperture for better light and separation.
Would love to hear your thoughts—especially from anyone who's used these lenses for youth sports.
I ran into a guy one time, random guy, referred to my Rebel SL2 and 55-250 as a "big %&! camera." So you might want to concentrate more on what you need, you're probably not as inconspicuous as you might like, even if it's considered a small lens on here
400/8 should be better at getting rid of a bg than 200/4, if you change distance to keep the subject the same size i.e. shoot at half the distance using 200mm f/4. Yes its f/8 but it's 400mm, I remember trying f/16 to get more in focus using 500mm one time, not much luck. You can crop 200mm to 400mm but that's a big crop
Id really recommend improving your high iso skills if you haven't yet, for instance 12800 shouldn't be too hard on the R6II, imo, and you should be able to go higher. 2.8 teles really get rid of a bg, bigger and more expensive though but old 300mm not too bad
p.1 #11 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
No offense, but you are spending a lot of time worrying about the conspicuousness of your lens choice when the difference will be small to your subjects. The difference between the 100-400 and a 70-200 is really negligible in the scheme of things. If you are trying to get a good sports images your actions will be far more conspicuous than your lens choices. You will be following the action up and down the field and be positioning yourself to get a good image. That will, and should be, conspicuous. Likewise, you will be down on your knees or laying on the ground to get yourself on plane with your subjects. That too will be conspicuous. Those kids will be paying very little attention to you once it becomes common to see you taking pictures which will occur somewhere during the first half. Get yourself a good 70-200 f2.8 IS II or III. It will be $1000 give or take a couple hundred dollars. The 70-200 is table stakes when it comes to sports photography and if you decide not to shoot sports in fhe future the resale market is not too bad. Do yourself a favor and get a good lens and learn all you can about how to get a good soccer photo. People stop worrying what you and your lens look like when they understand that it makes a good difference for your images.
p.1 #12 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
AmbientMike wrote:
400/8 should be better at getting rid of a bg than 200/4, if you change distance to keep the subject the same size i.e. shoot at half the distance using 200mm f/4. Yes its f/8 but it's 400mm, I remember trying f/16 to get more in focus using 500mm one time, not much luck. You can crop 200mm to 400mm but that's a big crop
I did a comparison of a 100-400 at 560/8 with the TC and a 70-200 2.8 cropped to match. My takeaway was that using the right focal length to get pixels on target beats all. The faster lens loses its background separation, sharpness, and lower ISO advantages the minute you start cropping.
Aug 07, 2025 at 03:17 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #13 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Mike_5D wrote:
I did a comparison of a 100-400 at 560/8 with the TC and a 70-200 2.8 cropped to match. My takeaway was that using the right focal length to get pixels on target beats all. The faster lens loses its background separation, sharpness, and lower ISO advantages the minute you start cropping.
I compared 85/1.4 vs 200/2.8 and kept the subject the same size in the frame, moving closer on the 85mm. The 200mm did a better job of getting rid of the bg, since less bg.
If you moved closer to the ball at 200mm, instead of cropping, you'd probably see the difference. Idk if I can find the photos, have seen the same in a a site comparing different lenses. The longer fl gets less °'s of bg, if you keep the subject the same size
But I agree, cropping 200mm to 560mm is too much. And 560mm at f/8 takes about the same front element,so it's similar to 200/2.8, even though its f/8. 560/8 should be better at getting rid of a bg, though
p.1 #14 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
If you're looking for a multi-purpose lens you can also use other than for soccer, then a 70-200 might be the way to go. The RF versions are nice because they're smaller and a lot lighter than the EF versions, but the one advantage of the EF versions is they all take the EF teleconverters (the new RF 70-200Z takes the RF TCs and is available in black, but it's also the most expensive option). With at least the 1.4x TC, you'd then have 280mm to work with. Otherwise, I think for field sports, your best bet is a 100-400 just for the flexibility of the zoom range that you won't get with a 70-200 & TC. IMO, longer than 200mm will be more useful than wider than 100mm. If you're concerned about the white lens attracting attention, I believe you can get vinyl skins for many of the more popular Canon lenses, and there should be black options (though I'm not sure if you can skin the part of the 100-400 that extends when you zoom).
Crop mode is really only useful if you're only shooting in-camera jpeg files and want to minimize work on the computer later. But yes, with the R6II, you're down to 9.3MP. It's not a lot but still enough for an 8x10 print at 300 dpi. The look of the image in crop mode is like you're shooting with a one-stop slower lens, in respect to background separation/blur compared to FF with the same framing. However, this might still be slightly better than FF with a 100-400 because that lens is slow(ish) throughout the full zoom range. It's already at f/5.0 from 135-311mm. 200/2.8 with 1.6x Canon APS-C crop will be ~320/4.5. Probably a wash in real world use. To get around the low resolution in APS-C crop would entail a different camera, whether the R5/R5II in crop mode, or the R7 for the most pixel 'reach.' But that camera has some compromises of its own. Canon really is missing a higher end APS-C option.
I agree with the concern about the RF 100-400 with respect to background separation. But you could rent one for a week from Lens Rentals for only about $40 to try before deciding (though that's without the hood, which is another $15). This is also true for the other lens options, but with the 70-200 and EF 100-400 lenses, you're looking at around $100/week.
Mike_5D's point about the relationship between camera/subject/background distance combinations is a very good one. It will have a significant impact on the look of images. Basically if you want nice isolated subject type action shots, you want the player large in the frame and will as much distance between them and the background as possible. It might sound obvious, but it's not always easy with busy backgrounds and where the action is happening. Generally if it's on the far side of the field across from you and therefore closer to the far sideline, it's not going to look as nice unless it's a spectacular play.
Also keep in mind if the games are on artificial turf that hot sunny days will result in a lot of heat waves coming off the field that will degrade image sharpness, and it will get worse the longer the focal length.
p.1 #15 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
I'm looking to pick up a lens to shoot my kids' soccer games...
About how old are you kids and what other sports do they/might they play?
Aug 07, 2025 at 09:30 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #16 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Mike_5D wrote:
I did a comparison of a 100-400 at 560/8 with the TC and a 70-200 2.8 cropped to match. My takeaway was that using the right focal length to get pixels on target beats all. The faster lens loses its background separation, sharpness, and lower ISO advantages the minute you start cropping.
p.1 #17 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
AmbientMike wrote:
That makes sense, 200/2.8 cropped , from the same distance, looking the same as 560/8 , since its basically the same aperture opening. Big crop though
But I actually managed to find the website I mentioned, if you scroll down a bit 85mm and 135mm have less degrees of bg vs 50mm since they're teles:
Big crop for sure. I was looking at it from the perspective of choosing between a faster/shorter lens vs a slower lens with the needed reach, especially in a low-light situation where the slower lens means pushing the ISOs from high up to extremely high. Of course, the best looking files will come from filling the frame at 200/2.8, but for soccer, that means covering a small portion of the field, and probably still needing to crop some. If your kid is the goalkeeper or striker and you park yourself even with the top of the box, the 70-200 will do. But 400mm just opens up more of the field for usable shots.
Aug 07, 2025 at 11:46 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #18 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Mike_5D wrote:
Big crop for sure. I was looking at it from the perspective of choosing between a faster/shorter lens vs a slower lens with the needed reach, especially in a low-light situation where the slower lens means pushing the ISOs from high up to extremely high. Of course, the best looking files will come from filling the frame at 200/2.8, but for soccer, that means covering a small portion of the field, and probably still needing to crop some. If your kid is the goalkeeper or striker and you park yourself even with the top of the box, the 70-200 will do. But 400mm just opens up more of the field for usable shots. ...Show more →
Maybe the 70-200 at 2.8 has better bokeh than a 100-400+ tc, but as far as quantity, you should be able to get rid of a bg better using 560/8.
It's f/8, but 560mm is long fl. People seem to get scared off of lenses like 800/11 seeing the 11 thinking there's no bokeh, but there's more than 200/2.8 since same front aperture requirement and longer fl
p.1 #19 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I shoot my kids' soccer 11v11 games, and I use a 120-300 mm Sigma lens on my R3, and it still feels short for soccer in my opinion. I had used it on my R6 previously. So I guess the question that we could ask is what age group? If they're not 11v11, a 70-200 is manageable.
p.1 #20 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Dpedraza wrote:
I shoot my kids' soccer 11v11 games, and I use a 120-300 mm Sigma lens on my R3, and it still feels short for soccer in my opinion. I had used it on my R6 previously. So I guess the question that we could ask is what age group? If they're not 11v11, a 70-200 is manageable.
I still like more reach even for 7v7. I just looked at a season a few years ago where I used the 70-200, 70-200 + 1.4x, and 100-400. 78% of my kept images were over 200mm and I still crop.
