simon_hodgson

I tested both of the above len's and couldn't really see any difference in sharpness or quality. They both produced excellent results, but when it came down to it, I couldn't justify spending the extra $$$. I've hand held the non IS at 1/200sec f5.6, at some recent motor racing in Australia, and the results were excellent. I'm yet to get any camera shake with this lens and this is also with a 2x attached to it! I am so happy with the results but if I had the extra cash I would still lean towards the IS. I have to say most of the time when I'm shooting sport I do use a mono pod though.

I've also found that with the f2.8 you are often shooting 4000 or even 1/8000 so camera shake is not even an issue.

 

I think what ever way you go, you will be extremely happy with your results they are an excellent lens.

I'm not an expert on skating as I come from Australia where we don't really have much of it. Anyway I'm with Keith I really don't think you need to spend that type of money. I have a 70-200L 2.8 and a 2x extender which I have found to work excellent in low light. I recently shot some motorsport at our famous race held in Bathurst each year. It was seriously dark in the morning and I found that by pushing just Provia 100f one stop and combining this with my equipment I had a major advantage of some of my mates who using the 100-100 4-5.6USM lens.

 

I realise this is not skating but it's still bloody quick and I reckon it was probably darker than it's ever going to be in a rink. I took quite a few shots with my extender on and the shutter at 1/200 at 5.6, and you can check out the results for yourself. They are in my portfolio under the Australian V8 supercar folder. They turned out extremely sharp and have printed out very nicely at A4. I contribute this to an excellent lens, very good film and a high quality scanner, not to mention an excellent body(1N), which focuses perfectly for action sports.

 

I really do think if you spend about $1200US on the lens and extender you will end up with a sensational package whilst still using film! I have tried the 1.4 extender and it is definitely quicker so you may also consider this.

 

Good luck with it.

Go the f/2.8! I've got it and use for similar purposes. I also use it with a 2x and have found the results very good. Have a look at my portfolio. All the motor racing shots were taken with the converter on an extremely dull day. This enabled me to still shoot at 1/200 f/5.6, and despite the fact that I had read the results would not be sharp, I think some of my shots speak for themselves. The 2.8 is well worth the extra $, and it's also excellent for portraits.

I was talking to the Canon rep in Sydney the other day and altough he didn't have the Ds with him, he did mention that the price was going to be $15,000 Aust. (Roughly half that for the $US, for you guys in North America). He had some shots on the computer taken with the Ds, and yeah they looked pretty sharp. Long long long way off for me. I'm quite happy with my IN for now!!

I tested both of the above len's and couldn't really see any difference in sharpness. They both produced excellent results, but when it came down to it, I couldn't justify spending the extra $$$. I've hand held the non IS at 1/200sec f5.6, at some recent motor racing in Australia, and the results were excellent. I'm yet to get any camera shake with this lens and this is also with a 2x attached to it! I am so happy with the results but if I had the extra cash I would still lean towards the IS. I have to say most of the time when I'm shooting sport I do use a mono pod though.

 

I've also found that with the f2.8 you are often shooting 4000 or even 1/8000 so camera shake is not even an issue.

 

I think what ever way you go, you will be extremely happy with your results they are an excellent lens.

I have been taking sports photo's (surfing, rugby, skiing) for quite

a few years. I have recently purchased an EOS1N body and have been

using a 75-300US zoom for these pics. Myself and my brother are now

considering starting a business on the side and as a result I'm in

the market for a new lens. I am tossing up the following option, a

70-200mm 2.8L (IS) with a 2x converter, or a 100-300mm 4-5.6L

(IS). Is this a good consideration or is there a better option??