BEST CANON LENS FOR ACTION SPORT PHOTOGRAPHY

Parko008

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 6, 2017
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
HELLO

I AM WANTING TO KNOW WHAT LENS I NEED TO TAKE MOVING ACTION SHOTS OF ATHLETES DOING ATHLETICS OUTDOORS IN DAY AND ALSO LATE AFTER NOON ON DUSK. I CAN BE CLOSE BUT YET CAN BE ABOUT 100MERTERS AWAY , THE CAMERA I HAVE IS A CANON EOS 6OD. I HAVE $2000.00 BUDGET CAN BE LITTLE OVER IF NEEDED...

THANKS
 
70-200 2.8 for sure!

Alternatively you could look at the Sigma 50-150 2.8 and the new 50-100 f/1.8 ART.
 
Yes....the earlier Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM is a fine lens as well, and available used at good prices like $1000 or so...the newer Mark II version is better with a teleconverter unit than the earlier model.

Be aware there was also an NON-IS f/2.8 model made for many years, along with the L-IS USM model; both are fine lenses!
 
I'll be another to say the 70-200mm f2.8 L in either its original, it IS or its IS MII version. The newest has the highest price but the best optics, whilst the older models are still great lenses but just not "as" good as the newer (but still pro quality).


70-200mm will do most of what you need for sports; the other options tend to be things like 300mm f2.8 primes and even up to 400mm f2.8 and 500mm - but they tend to be very very expensive plus require a back-up closer lens for when the action moves closer - so even then a 70-200mm is a solid investment now and for the future.
 
Yes....the earlier Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM is a fine lens as well, and available used at good prices like $1000 or so...the newer Mark II version is better with a teleconverter unit than the earlier model.

Be aware there was also an NON-IS f/2.8 model made for many years, along with the L-IS USM model; both are fine lenses!



ok thanks for that but a question

what would you recommend would be best?

Thanks
 
ok thanks for that but a question

what would you recommend would be best?

Thanks
 
I'll be another to say the 70-200mm f2.8 L in either its original, it IS or its IS MII version. The newest has the highest price but the best optics, whilst the older models are still great lenses but just not "as" good as the newer (but still pro quality).


70-200mm will do most of what you need for sports; the other options tend to be things like 300mm f2.8 primes and even up to 400mm f2.8 and 500mm - but they tend to be very very expensive plus require a back-up closer lens for when the action moves closer - so even then a 70-200mm is a solid investment now and for the future.
 
hello

thanks so whats the newest model and is much more then the
I'll be another to say the 70-200mm f2.8 L in either its original, it IS or its IS MII version. The newest has the highest price but the best optics, whilst the older models are still great lenses but just not "as" good as the newer (but still pro quality).


70-200mm will do most of what you need for sports; the other options tend to be things like 300mm f2.8 primes and even up to 400mm f2.8 and 500mm - but they tend to be very very expensive plus require a back-up closer lens for when the action moves closer - so even then a 70-200mm is a solid investment now and for the future.





hi there

thanks for that so whats the newer model? and how much more is it do you know ?

Thank you
 
Several good options here.

I own both the original EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM as well as the version "II" (currently that lens is about $1900). The differences are:

1) The version II has improved the optics. This almost suggests the optics in the I weren't good... in fact they are great. The difference doesn't jump out at you, you really have to pixel-peep to notice the improvement.

2) The version II has improved the speed of auto-focus.

3) The version II has improved the Image Stabilization system. This means when you're shooting 4 stops below the minimum recommended shutter speed for hand-held photography without image stabilization, the II will be more likely to get a "keeper" than the I. IS doesn't "guarantee" you can shoot at low speed and still have no blur from camera motion... it just skews the odds for you to make the probability of getting a "keeper" to be more likely. The II would have a better "keeper" rate than the I.

One caution about IS ... the IS system only helps eliminate blur caused by CAMERA movement. It does not help eliminate blur caused by SUBJECT movement. Since you're shooting action photography, you'll still need fast shutter speeds to deal with the subject movement.

Both of these lenses have something that really stands out in the industry -- they're NOT "heavy breathers". Most other lenses in their range actually are heavy breathers. That means that if you zoom to the 200mm end you'd think you actually have a 200mm lens. On a "heavy breather" you'd only really be at 200mm if you focus to infinity. Focus closer to minimum focusing distance for the lens and the focal length drops dramatically (a heavy breathing 70-200mm lens set to 200mm but focused to minimum focus distance usually *actually* has a focal length down in the 130-150mm range (no kidding!)). These Canon lenses actually stay within 5%... meaning at 200mm and minimum focus distance they are still providing 190mm -- which his extremely good performance for a lens.

200mm isn't a lot of focal length when shooting subjects 100 meters away. For that, you might prefer something in the 300-400mm range.

The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II is a fantastic performing lens (about $2000)... but remember that this is a variable focal ratio lens where the f-stop can drop to as low as f/5.6 when zoomed to the 400mm lens (meaning it's getting 1/4 as much light as the 200mm f/2.8). You would have absolutely no problem in mid-day and evening... but at dusk you might start wishing you had an f/2.8 lens.

Another possibility is to pair the 70-200mm lens with a 1.4x or 2x extender. The 1.4x converts a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens into a 98-280mm f/4. The 2x converts it into a 140-400mm f/5.6. But usually there is a slight overall loss in sharpness when you add an extender into the optical path (there is no free lunch). You probably should go look for some sample images because while what I said is technically true, there are lots of examples where photographers get extremely good results.
 
Several good options here.

I own both the original EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM as well as the version "II" (currently that lens is about $1900). The differences are:

1) The version II has improved the optics. This almost suggests the optics in the I weren't good... in fact they are great. The difference doesn't jump out at you, you really have to pixel-peep to notice the improvement.

2) The version II has improved the speed of auto-focus.

3) The version II has improved the Image Stabilization system. This means when you're shooting 4 stops below the minimum recommended shutter speed for hand-held photography without image stabilization, the II will be more likely to get a "keeper" than the I. IS doesn't "guarantee" you can shoot at low speed and still have no blur from camera motion... it just skews the odds for you to make the probability of getting a "keeper" to be more likely. The II would have a better "keeper" rate than the I.

One caution about IS ... the IS system only helps eliminate blur caused by CAMERA movement. It does not help eliminate blur caused by SUBJECT movement. Since you're shooting action photography, you'll still need fast shutter speeds to deal with the subject movement.

Both of these lenses have something that really stands out in the industry -- they're NOT "heavy breathers". Most other lenses in their range actually are heavy breathers. That means that if you zoom to the 200mm end you'd think you actually have a 200mm lens. On a "heavy breather" you'd only really be at 200mm if you focus to infinity. Focus closer to minimum focusing distance for the lens and the focal length drops dramatically (a heavy breathing 70-200mm lens set to 200mm but focused to minimum focus distance usually *actually* has a focal length down in the 130-150mm range (no kidding!)). These Canon lenses actually stay within 5%... meaning at 200mm and minimum focus distance they are still providing 190mm -- which his extremely good performance for a lens.

200mm isn't a lot of focal length when shooting subjects 100 meters away. For that, you might prefer something in the 300-400mm range.

The Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II is a fantastic performing lens (about $2000)... but remember that this is a variable focal ratio lens where the f-stop can drop to as low as f/5.6 when zoomed to the 400mm lens (meaning it's getting 1/4 as much light as the 200mm f/2.8). You would have absolutely no problem in mid-day and evening... but at dusk you might start wishing you had an f/2.8 lens.

Another possibility is to pair the 70-200mm lens with a 1.4x or 2x extender. The 1.4x converts a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens into a 98-280mm f/4. The 2x converts it into a 140-400mm f/5.6. But usually there is a slight overall loss in sharpness when you add an extender into the optical path (there is no free lunch). You probably should go look for some sample images because while what I said is technically true, there are lots of examples where photographers get extremely good results.







wow thanks so much for all that, its alot of info lol so one last question should i go with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II

or the 70-200mm f2.8 do u happen to know the new version of the f2.8 what would you go with if you were using it for what i need it for

thanks
 
wow thanks so much for all that, its alot of info lol so one last question should i go with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II

or the 70-200mm f2.8 do u happen to know the new version of the f2.8 what would you go with if you were using it for what i need it for

thanks
 
For indoors or in low light (eg early morning or evening) the 70-200mm f2.8 would be my choice. You need the f2.8 aperture for the low light conditions to help you capture as much light as possible for a good exposure.

For outdoors in good light then the 100-400mm would give an edge in range and likely be a very solid choice; but in lower light you will find it will struggle.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top