p.2 #2 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Uarctos wrote:
The EF lens hands down out of those 3. Reach, background separation and image quality.
yes, it's not even close.
Get the Canon EF 70-200 2.8 with converter or the EF 100-400. I still use my 20 year old Canon 100-400 v1 on Canon mirrorless
p.2 #3 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Thanks so much for all the input, it’s great to hear so many different perspectives.
My older kid is 14 and plays 11v11 on a full-size field, so based on what I’m hearing, it sounds like the 70-200 probably won’t give me enough reach. I think part of my uncertainty is that I don’t really have a good sense yet of how the different focal lengths will actually look from the sidelines or behind the goal line.
I’m also a bit hesitant to invest in an expensive EF lens right now, since prices will probably keep dropping. I’m leaning toward picking up an RF 100-400 for now, just to get a feel for the different focal lengths and figure out how I like to shoot (and from where on the field). After that, I can decide whether it’s worth waiting for a dedicated faster telephoto, or maybe going for an EF 100-400 II later.
By the way, is $500 a fair price for a used RF 100-400?
p.2 #4 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
<snip>
By the way, is $500 a fair price for a used RF 100-400?
In today's market, that price seems fair. The current refurbished price is $560 and used sellers like MPB are over $600. Just as a point of comparison, I purchased the lens refurbished from Canon about two years ago for under $400.
p.2 #5 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
400mm on a full sized pitch isn't nearly as long as it sounds. That's especially true if you shoot from behind the goal line with enough distance for safety.
p.2 #7 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I shoot kids soccer in our village with 300 f2,8. Nobody from the kids bats an eye, especially during the game. They might be aware of you during the first game or first few games, but as you shoot regularly, they will get used to you and your gear, no matter what you will end up using.
Second - In soccer, you will have to accept the fact that you will not be able to capture every possible action. It just won't happen, no matter what lens you will use. Even if you had 100-800 f2.8, you would still run into situations like a player or bunch of players blocking your view as you try to capture some obscure action on the other side of the field, when both players showing you nothing but their backs.
Since you're not doing this on a pro level (think FIFA or UEFA) you will actually have the luxury of sitting at the sideline. In pro matches, this is usually not possible and photographers are only allowed to sit at the end lines. And they aren't even allowed to change their positons during the play. If you screwed up and picked the wrong side, you can change during the half time.
I don't know what position your kid plays, but based on what I wrote above, in pro setting it would be downright impossible to capture a defense action from the attacking endline. And if you sit at the sideline to capture the defense, you will miss goal scoring and celebrating. Like I said, you can't possibly capture everything during a single game. Here's my advice. Assess the oposing team. If your kid's team is better or vastly better, sit on the attacking endline and capture the attackers and goals. If the opponent is better or vastly better, with little to no chance of your team attacking or scoring (this happens a lot too), sit either on the sideline or your endline and capture the defencemen, since they will be in action a lot.
p.2 #8 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
A 70-200 or a 300mm is fine if you don’t want to shoot the game at all parts of the field. You pick to shoot where you can be close to the action. I think for most of us this is fine. If you feel you have to get every possible tackle and goal from every part of field, then longer lenses or fiddling with TCs becomes necessary.
p.2 #9 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
There’s a sigma 150-600 contemporary for sale locally for $950. Would that be a good option? I have the adapter but not sure about AF performance
I would do some research. At one point there was some firmware incmpatibility that led to pulsating AF on that lens. At least I think. I also think it was resolved by Sigma, but that may require you to buy a dock to flash it.
Look at the EF 100-400 L vII. I probably have 50k frames of youth soccer on mine, if not more. Takes the 1.4tc vIII very well. Fast AF on R6, R5 and R3, all of which I have tried directly myself.
I agree with what others say - you can't get everything everywhere. But you can pick a spot - I like to be about 10-20m to one side of the center line - and get a lot of different stuff. You'll get good shots of the offense one half, the defense the second half, and the midfield both times. You can also get some good goalie shots - widefield on the far goal and closer in on the near one.
When the ball is rolling up and down the far sideline, take a break.
p.2 #10 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
ruipeixoto wrote:
There’s a sigma 150-600 contemporary for sale locally for $950. Would that be a good option? I have the adapter but not sure about AF performance
If it’s used, that is not a good price, and I don’t think it’s the best option. I had both the 150-600 and 100-400II when I went mirrorless with the R6. The 150-600 was my go to on mirrored bodies, however I sold it and kept the 100-400, and it, with and without a 1.4x, is my go to. The 150-600 became redundant since with RF bodies the 100-400II takes the 1.4x so well with no degradation in AF. Even with the 1.4, the 100-400 felt snappier than the 150-600 and the AF was just more confident. I did experience some pulsing as has been reported. At $950, I’d go with the 100-400II every time.
I’ve since added the RF 70-200 F4, and other shorter RF lenses, but the 100-400II remains as my long zoom option. I shot high school cross country and track last season and it was the best option for its ability to shoot longer and compress the background. I tried the 70-200, but even with runners coming at me, it was to short for my taste, but did use it for indoor swim since it was a 10 lane 25 meter pool and had access to the deck during meets. However, I still could not adequately cover the furthest 4 lanes across from me with the 70-200, and the lighting is just not good enough for the 100-400. If I had the funds, a 300 F/2.8 would have been ideal for both!
p.2 #11 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I ended up picking up a used 100-400mm, and it’s being delivered today. I’m planning to use it for the next few games to get a feel for how the FLs work in the field. I’m not aiming to capture every action shot during the game, I mostly want to get a few great shots of my kids to keep as memories and help motivate them to keep playing.
That said, I’m already 99% sure I won’t be fully satisfied with the type of shots the 100-400 delivers, so I'm thinking I’ll probably end up getting a 70-200mm f/2.8 for more selective shots (or maybe this is just the GAS kicking in) especially if I can position myself near where my kids play or behind the goal.
But I'd rather end up with a few really nice images than hundreds of mediocre ones from random plays. I also see the 70-200/2.8 being useful for other school events and as a general-purpose portrait lens. But maybe I'm wrong and find out I'll really need the 200-400FL for useful shots...which would complicate things a bit more.
Their first games are next weekend, I’ll report back afterward. Thanks again for all the helpful input!
p.2 #12 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
In what way do you not expect the 100-400 to deliver? If it's insufficient background separation, you don't have any option other than a significantly larger financial investment that will result in a physically much larger lens.
IMO to maximize the 100-400's potential, you have to work within its sweet spot. And IMO this means frame-filling images in the 300-400mm range, likely shooting from behind the end/goal line down the field so you can maximize subject/background separation. The added benefit of this lens is you can zoom out to cover <200mm without removing a teleconverter. But the tradeoff is shooting at f/4.5 or f/5.0 rather than f/2.8. If you end up mostly shooting <200mm, then yeah, it's the wrong lens and you'd benefit from a 2-stop faster lens if you want more background separation. But from decades covering field sports, there is huge value in having >300mm coverage.
Plus with editing software today, it's one button click to create an AI background mask to which you can apply negative texture, clarity or Gaussian blur for additional separation.
Rather than just following your kids, use the first couple games to try different positions around the field and photograph anyone within the sweet spot to get a feel for how it works. The one downside of using a zoom that I found challenging to deal with when photographing sports was the sometimes subconscious tendency to unnecessarily zoom out, which would result in looser/wider than expected compositions. It's not unusual to have some degree of tunnel vision while following action through the viewfinder, kind of losing track of where the edges of the frame are and feeling like the composition is too tight when it's actually not. If you find this happening, maybe set it to 400mm and treat it like a prime lens at first, not zooming it at all (unless maybe it's great action of your kids).
p.2 #13 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
rscheffler wrote:
The one downside of using a zoom that I found challenging to deal with when photographing sports was the sometimes subconscious tendency to unnecessarily zoom out, which would result in looser/wider than expected compositions.
I'm definitely guilty of this. Maybe next time I'll just tape the lens to 300mm or 400mm and see how it goes.
p.2 #14 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
When My daughter played soccer I used a 70-200 2.8 plus a 1.4 TC, and a 100-400. But my favorite lens was the Canon EF 400 f4 DO II. It’s quick, great to hand hold, and produces nice clean backgrounds. I still use it today even though I have a bunch of other great lenses.
p.2 #15 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I take photos of junior rugby. I have had most success with the EF 100-400 L. There are times when this is too short and other times when it is too long. Since most shots are of my grandsons scoring tries I'm not looking for photos of the action at long distances. Position is everything for getting good images and if I can't move freely around the dead-ball area I generally don't bother. Photoing from the back corner area covers the try line well. A 70-200 would also work well for closer tries but it is getting short if the camera is the width of the field away.
I think one criteria is the speed of AF, and in this regard the 150-600s are too slow and the action too fast., just a frustrating experience. The pulsing only occurs at short subject distances so it is not a problem, but the slow AF is. I have also tried my 200-800 but once again I think the AF is too slow and the lens too long, but if you are restricted to a grandstand position it might be the best choice.
Whatever lens is used it is a compromise, it will not be perfect for all circumstances.
p.2 #16 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
I just tried my new 70-200 2.8 EF vIII with 1.4TC for flag football (American football, but no tackling). Surprisingly good results. 280 f/4 is a good focal length for about half the field. And it helps me in the dark. Still miss the extra reach of the 100-400 sometimes and will likely stick with that unless its evening/dark out.
p.2 #17 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
jedibrain wrote:
I just tried my new 70-200 2.8 EF vIII with 1.4TC for flag football (American football, but no tackling). Surprisingly good results. 280 f/4 is a good focal length for about half the field. And it helps me in the dark. Still miss the extra reach of the 100-400 sometimes and will likely stick with that unless its evening/dark out.
Brian
I shot some flag games a couple of years ago, many of them at dusk. I found that using the 100-400 as long as possible as the light faded was better than cropping from the 70-200. Once the ISO was consistently north of 25k, I switched to the 70-200 and just had to accept there were shots I couldn't get any more.
p.2 #18 · help me choose a lens for kids outdor soccer (on a R6mkii)
Mike_5D wrote:
I shot some flag games a couple of years ago, many of them at dusk. I found that using the 100-400 as long as possible as the light faded was better than cropping from the 70-200. Once the ISO was consistently north of 25k, I switched to the 70-200 and just had to accept there were shots I couldn't get any more.
I think its how you crop that matters. Further than about, say 30 yards from where you're standing you're not going to crop to isolation images of a single player. You're looking for a wider view, maybe just cropping the fore ground or background a little for context. But totally agree. Longer is better for field sports in general.
I'm just happy the combo works for this purpose. Another tool in the bag, which I had originally bought for indoor performances and award ceremonies. Now it has a dual use.
