Jump to content

Shooting soccer games with Canon lens


drew_prozeller

Recommended Posts

If I were choosing between those two I'd favor the 70-300, because I like the extra length and

the IS. Personally, I shoot such events with Canon's 100-400, and I really like it. I have not

tried the other two lenses. Especially with the Rebel, though, I think you're better off with

one of these lenses that start at 70mm. The 100-400 is really a bit too long on the low end

to shoot sports close-up with a cropped-sensor camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used a 100-300 on my KM but found that it can be too long at the short end on a crop camera if working near the endline, so a 120-300 may not entirely suit your style or may require some change of location.

 

However, of the two you asked about (besides being a ton or two cheaper than some of the alternatives), I'd suggest you check which one is fastest to respond/focus on the camera. Soccer is very dynamic and not very unpredictable. The 70-200/f4 L is f4 all the way and is reputed to be extremely fast - right up there with the 70-200/f2.8s (when deciding between Canon and Nikon, this f4 L was a heavy point in considering Canon due to it's reputation and low price). I'd expect, even though the wide end can be useful, much of the time, you would be working at the long end of either lens. So now the 70-300 is at f5.6. So you will be stretching to keep shutter speeds up to "stop" action more with this one than with the f4.

 

Without having tried either in a real game, I'd figure the 70-200/4 L would have a speed advantage, both aperture and in focus responsiveness. And if trying at night or early/late games, a 2.8 would be welcome as well. The 2.8s offer some esthetic advantage in narrow field so the background can be less obtrusive but they are more expensive. With the KM, I had AS in the body but don't think it did much generally in soccer as I kept shutter speeds up anyways. However, under other circumstances/uses, it might well be worth having. (Had I decided on the Canon side, I'd probably have one of the 70-200/4 Ls now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use a 200/2 and 400/2.8 for soccer on a Canon 10D, so the same 1.6x factor. The 400 is a little long and the 200/2 is a little short. While 300 would be perfect I do not recommend the 70-300 IS. You get the poor optics typical of these lenses with extremely expensive IS which will be of no use for soccer or any other sports realistically.

 

 

If choosing between the lenses listed I'd definitely go for the 70-200/4 L for optical quality, and for speed that is still very useful for shooting at ISO 100 in full sun.

 

 

You could also look at the Canon EF 300mm f4 L or the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L (no IS version) or the Canon EF 200/2.8 L with a 1.4x converter.

 

 

If you end up shooting under lights at night the f2.8 may allow using 800 ISO, while the f4 will force using the very high ISO ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that John Crowe is thinking of the old Canon 75-300 IS lens (which is not a good choice), rather than the new 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM which has image quality that is perhaps comparable with the Canon 70-200 f/4 L, and also focusses a lot faster than any of Canon's 75-300 lenses, albeit not as fast as the other lenses discussed here and in your previous thread. I agree that IS is of marginal use when you are basically using high shutter speeds to freeze motion.

 

Roughly speaking, on a 1.6 crop body you can fill the frame with a player by using 65mm of focal length for every 10 yards of subject distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...