Is a 70-200L 2.8 IS with 1.4 TC enough length for youth sports?

[m._scott_clay1]

<p>I've had quite a few requests lately for "youth sports" photography. Mostly little league baseball and high school football. I've been doing Weddings, Portraits, Products and Architecture for years and have all the necessary equipment I need for those endeavors. I really haven't done much in the way of "sports" shooting. I traded off my 100-400L last year for a 24L TS-E, so I don't have anything longer than the 70-200L 2.8 IS. I do have Canon 1.4x and 2x Tele-converters. The 1.4x works well will with my 70-200, but I'm not happy with the 2x.</p>

<p>I might should have posted this in the sports section, but really want to hear from other Canon users it see if they have had success with my current combo or the 100-400L in youth sports or if I should go for a 400 or longer prime. Also, I've always been a believer in IS for longer lenses, but they are so pricey in the longer "L" series lenses. Do I really need IS for someone running down a field catching a football?</p>

<p>Most likely, I'll use a 40d or 50d rather than the 5d (for speed and distance). These images will be for sale so I'm only considering "L" lenses right now. I just passed on an older 300L non IS for $600. I probably should have bough it, but money is tight so I need to spend only what I need to spend and I wasn't sure it would be long enough.</p>

<p>Right now, dollar wise, I can only spend $1000. I can get a used 100-400L for that. Just not sure it's the correct lens for the job. Are there any 3rd party long lenses that will stack up to "L" image quality?</p>

<p>Thank you all in advance for your comments. M. Scott Clay </p>

<p> </p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>With an APS-C sensor you probably don't even need the 1.4x depending on how close you are. For ice hockey shot from the boards I use a mix of 70-200 F2.8 and 300 f2.8 on full frame. My 70-200 f2.8 is non-IS and I shoot ice hockey and skating with it and do not miss IS as I need high shutter spoeeds given the speed of the sports. The 300 F2.8 is IS and it does help on this lens but it is much bigger and heavier to hand hold than the 70-200 f2.8. Unless you are shooting a lot at night you do not need the IS. Indeed I bought the non-IS version as it was lighter, cheaper and had higer image quality than the two IS versions I tested. This is not to say that the 70-200 non IS is definatively better quality as it is possible there is more sample variation in the IS lenses. There have been lots of posts on this topic and some shooters have reached a similar conclusion to me while others have the opposite conclusion. The 100-400 is probably to slow for sports use and based on brief use seems to have slower AF performance. If you do not need AF look at the 70-200 non IS it has very fast (and accurate AF - being an F2.8 USM lens) and i bought mine new for $1040 a few years ago - while they have probably got more expensive you should be able to get a good used one for $1000.</p>

[harold_motte]

<p>Hi, I use the 70-200 F4 L is/usm for high school football even last night and have had no problem as long as the light is good. I did not need to put my 1.4tc on it - but I have access to the sidelines and move up and down the field with the action. I could have kept shooting a little longer if I had the f/2.8 versio on the field last night becuase of the lighing. The lighing is not the same at every high school football field and even then it changes at different places on the field. I am thinking of selling the F4 and getting the 2.8. BUT, as far as needing to put the 1.4tc on it - No. My 70-200 is still very fast and af works great with the 1.4tc but not with the 2tc.<br>

Personally I like the zoom over the prime for sports and the photos are ex with the L lenses. The 300m prime I had I sold due to having to zoom these fast moving sports with my legs and having to wait for the action to be at the right distance I wanted - that is just my personal preference. I am sure there will be someone trying to correct me as saying the 300 wasn't good for these sports, they are.<br>

For soccer I use the 100-400 but <strong>same light thing with that lens !</strong><br>

Best Wishes<strong><br /> </strong></p>

<p> </p>

[samoksner]

<p>It depends where you can be, but from the sidelines, on a crop body, no TC is probably best. Bring the TC and give it a try, but i think that's all you need. That's all i use and i do fine.</p>

[tom_kessler]

<p>I use a 40D and a 70-200/2.8L IS for high school soccer, and it's adequate. I've taken photos at several of the area high schools, and can tell you that when the sun goes down, and I'm entirely dependant on lighting, I'm shooting at ISO 3200, and I'm wide open, with average shutter speeds in the 200-250 range. Ocassionally the action will come to a better lit spots, and I'll see 320, but that's it. If f4 was max aperture, the camera would be in the bag at midpoint in the first half, period. I'm findind 200 to be the low threshold for beating motion blur. Before the season, I toyed with the idea of getting a 300/4, there were a couple availble locally, but after the first game, it was obvious it wouldn't see much use, so I dropped the idea. I do find the IS very helpful, if I didn't have it, I'd bring a tripod or monopod. Maybe I'm a "Shakey Jake", but using the IS helps steady the viewfinder, and just makes things easier. Sports isn't terribly different that wildlife in that more reach can always go to good use, but 200mm seems to work OK. The 100-400 would probably be great for daylight games, but I doubt it will be fast enough for night games. Since you already have the lens and converter, why not just give it a try?</p>

[m._scott_clay1]

<p>Thank you all for your comments. I feel comfortable going with what I have now, since all of you have had good experiences with 200. My 70-200L 2.8 IS has always been my favorite lens anyway. I really didn't want to buy another lens (especially since I traded my 100-400) but I realize I need the right equipment for the job.</p>

<p>As Sam suggested, I'll take the 1.4x TC along just in case. I guess that is the point of having one, just in case you need that extra 80mm.</p>

<p>This is what I like so much about this forum. You can ask questions from people who have actually done what you want to do with the equipment you currently have. I appreciate your time and opinions.<br>

Thanks again.......M. Scott Clay</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>If your shutter speed is high enough to freeze the players' motions, then it's high enough that you don't need IS.</p>

<p>I'd say try it. See what happens. Depending on the size of the field, you may not need more than 200mm, especially on a crop body. Be aware that when you add the teleconverter, the speed of the autofocus will slow down.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[tom_spalding]

<p>If you have sideline access, you'll get plenty of good shots with your 40D and a 70-200 f2.8. I prefer to use the 1.4x TC in addition as long as the light allows to reduce the amount of cropping I have to do to get interesting images. </p>

<p>Football action is much more complicated and chaotic than soccer or baseball, and the lighting is generally poor. At anything over 1/400 you start to see motion blur. So be prepared to shoot at high ISO. Take a lot of photos and you'll get a few keepers.</p>

<p>If it's not too late, I'd get that 300mm lens. I use mine (sometimes with the 1.4x TC) to shoot from the lower bleachers or the end zone. Both can be more interesting perspectives that straight sideline shots, and you'll definitely need the length. If you have two bodies, you could put the 300 on one and the 70-200 on another, with one body on a monopod and one on a strap.</p>

<p>You might want to experiment with fill flash. I have, and I like the results (although my 430 EX flash can't keep up with a quick series of shots). The players don't seem bothered by the flash, although I hear some stadiums don't allow it.</p>

<p>Here's a couple of links you might find useful.<br>

<a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/NFL/site.html#/home">http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/NFL/site.html#/home</a><br>

<a href="http://www.theimageengineer.com/2008/07/night-football-with-flash/">http://www.theimageengineer.com/2008/07/night-football-with-flash/</a></p>