Sigma EX 100-300mm f/2.8 HSM vs Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS + Canon 1.4 TC

I've saved my dollars and I'm ready to start shooting youth soccer.

My thinking is to start with the most versatile lens capable of

handling variable light and of reaching out to almost 30 yds, while

giving good background blur, tight composition - all those sports

photo values. The cost of either alternative is about the same.

 

This'll be my one tele for quite awhile, so the lens needs

versatility for non-soccer shooting, too. I have a Canon 28-105mm

f3.5-4.5 USM for the "short" side. I'm using an Elan 7 body, btw.

 

ANY advice is much appreciated. Thanks in advance.

 

Mike

This is really, really hard. The 120-300 (which I assume you meant) is extremely sharp. Prime sharp, actually. The 70-200IS is stabilized.

 

Unless you KNOW that you're never going to be using the lens anywhere except the soccer field together with a tri/monopod, then I'd get the 70-200 and a 2x. You get a 70-200IS and a 120-400/5.6. The 1.4x isn't that much of a great improvement in reach.

Thanks for the insight - I am having a lot of trouble deciding this one. My experience (which is very limited) is that the f/5.6 is too slow except in sun-drenched conditions. I've shot late in the day and under cloudcover with a 300mm f/5.6 and shutter speed becomes a factor: lots of blurred players - below 1/500 is not a good place to be.

 

Then again, the reach of a 300-400mm is a big help to fill the frame, esp. with young players. I'm thinking of working on my skills with the 70-200mm, letting the action come to me more, and not trying to nail shots across midfield. Does this make sense?

The 70-200 would be effective out to 30 meters, and contray to the advice of above poster the 1.4 convertor is a stop faster (f4 wide open) and allows full autofocus on a your Elan whereas the 2x convertor does not.

 

The 120-300 2.8 would be the best choice for soccer and I am sure you will find plenty of other opportunites to use it once you had it!

 

Of course you could have the best of both worlds and get the 70-200 2.8 HSM AND the 120-300 2.8 HSM Sigmas.

I have the 70-200 2.8L IS with a 1.4x TC on a 10D. I think this lens is fantastic even with the 1.4X TC and would recommend it for what you are trying to do. I would skip the 2x TC as you loose AF and two stops as well as a significant loss in picture quality. The 70-200 is a very versatile lens, albeit a bit on the heavy side.

If this helps at all, I have a 10D with the 70-200 f/2.8 with the 2xTC and all of my sports are shot with that lens until I can afford a 400 f/2.8. I find that by using the teleconverter I loose more DOF isolation rather than speed because the IS makes up for 3 stops with that combination. Take a look at <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=414105"> My Motorsport Photos </a> </div> if you think it would help.

 

Good luck,

Norman

Thanks everyone - all the advice is helpful. The variations in responses confirms that the answer isn't easy or obvious. I've now trialed the Sigma 120-300mm and the Canon 70-200mm. Both deliver very sharp, contrasty, high bokeh images. Both have more than adequate AF speed. Aye, aye, aye - can't make up my mind.

 

I'm leaning toward the Sigma because of the better value per dollar spent. With limited funds I can own more glass that way. Of course, Andy Mead (a really fine pro soccer photog) was kind enough to offer the opinion that working on my skills with the one Canon lens makes a lot of sense. Master of one lens is far better than being a mediocre shooter with many lenses!

 

Thanks again, y'all!

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I finally decided to go with the Sigma EX 120-300mm f/2.8 HSM, and I'm saving for the the Sigma EX 70-200mm f/2.8. The Canon is a lovely piece of equipment, but my budget can't support Canon L prices. To have the equivalent two lenses from Canon is something like $2,000+. My trials of each lens seem to show that there really isn't nearly enough performance difference between each to justify the enormous price swing. And those who've had meaningful experience with Sigma EX lenses are pretty uniform in their praise. Now I'm off to practice ...