Canon best telephoto sports lens

J

Jonny breeze

Messages
21
Name
Jonny breeze
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey,
I am interested in a telephoto lens for my Canon 5d Mark ii for sports photography (mainly rugby). I have looked at a few lenses and I am wondering if you could advise me which is the best or any other lenses. I am looking to buy the lens used and for preferably around £500. Below is the lenses I have considered and any questions with them. Many thanks Jonny.

Canon 70-200 f4L non is - does it have good enough reach?

Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 mark i
Canon 300 f4 prime
Sigma 150-600 & Tamron 150-600
Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6

Do these lenses let in enough light for daytime sports?
 
Jonny breeze said:
Do these lenses let in enough light for daytime sports?
Click to expand...

not really no... in winter the lighting goes early and the floodlights are on at 3pm ... if your in a fantastic stadium that has great lights then OK but i have a feeling your not? even if your just in a field poor lighting in winter would dictate faster lens.. you might get away with f4 at a push but i wouldnt touch anything that goes over f4 at the longer zoom
 
Taking what Tony has said but assuming this is for amateur use only you might want to consider the EF 400 f5.6 L prime lens.
The 100-400 has a reputation for variable quality and being a push-pull isn't to everyone's liking. Caveat to that is I love mine and it's a sharp copy that compares well to my 400 prime.
I found the Sigma 150-600 too heavy, you might not and maybe a monopod will solve that issue, wasn't practical for my uses though.
70/200 f4 delivered pretty good results with a 1.4 converter and even a 2x didn't degrade it too much but at f8 AF will be an issue on a 5d2, single centre spot works on a 5d3/4 (7d's and 1d's too).
Matt
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
not really no... in winter the lighting goes early and the floodlights are on at 3pm ... if your in a fantastic stadium that has great lights then OK but i have a feeling your not? even if your just in a field poor lighting in winter would dictate faster lens.. you might get away with f4 at a push but i wouldnt touch anything that goes over f4 at the longer zoom
Click to expand...

Any recommendations then for sports lenses?
 
I will add.. if this is sunday mornign stuff then f5.6 is fine..i am guessing its not top end sport but if you can guarantee good light such as morning sport (i do a lot of it) then yeagh any of those lens
 
MatBin said:
Taking what Tony has said but assuming this is for amateur use only you might want to consider the EF 400 f5.6 L prime lens.
The 100-400 has a reputation for variable quality and being a push-pull isn't to everyone's liking. Caveat to that is I love mine and it's a sharp copy that compares well to my 400 prime.
I found the Sigma 150-600 too heavy, you might not and maybe a monopod will solve that issue, wasn't practical for my uses though.
70/200 f4 delivered pretty good results with a 1.4 converter and even a 2x didn't degrade it too much but at f8 AF will be an issue on a 5d2, single centre spot works on a 5d3/4 (7d's and 1d's too).
Matt
Click to expand...

Thank you I'll look into the 400 prime
 
Jonny breeze said:
Any recommendations then for sports lenses?
Click to expand...


what level are you shooting at ...are you thinking non league football or sunday morning leagues? this will have a bearing on how much light and other considerations
 
KIPAX said:
what level are you shooting at ...are you thinking non league football or sunday morning leagues? this will have a bearing on how much light and other considerations
Click to expand...

Saturday afternoons normally. I'm shooting a schools first team full of 18 year old boys as they r mates and I enjoy photography and sports.
 
Jonny breeze said:
Thank you I'll look into the 400 prime
Click to expand...
Light, great AF, great iq, not too bad a price, might have to go a bit higher than your budget but they hold their price well, at least until a much wanted is version comes along.
 
Jonny breeze said:
Saturday afternoons normally. I'm shooting a schools first team full of 18 year old boys as they r mates and I enjoy photography and sports.
Click to expand...


well to be honest.. you know what the light is like in winter months.. gets quite dark for photogrpahy when the weather is bad let alone poor lighting... you can get away with any lens.. but for best results or at least for more keepers :) the faster the lens the better... one camera.. one lens? 70-200 f2.8 would be my choice and they can be got in your price range..
 
KIPAX said:
well to be honest.. you know what the light is like in winter months.. gets quite dark for photogrpahy when the weather is bad let alone poor lighting... you can get away with any lens.. but for best results or at least for more keepers :) the faster the lens the better... one camera.. one lens? 70-200 f2.8 would be my choice and they can be got in your price range..
Click to expand...

What do they normally go for? Also should I be looking at 3rd party lenses like Sigma and Tamron or staying with Canon. The canons look very pricey new!
 
Is it a one off or ongoing? One off, then I would hire a lens, ongoing, piggy bank time :)
Matt
 
MatBin said:
Is it a one off or ongoing? One off, then I would hire a lens, ongoing, piggy bank time :)
Matt
Click to expand...
Are lenses expensive to hire? It's going to be an ongoing thing but If they are cheap to hire would they be worth It? Never thought of that thx!
 
Jonny breeze said:
What do they normally go for? Also should I be looking at 3rd party lenses like Sigma and Tamron or staying with Canon. The canons look very pricey new!
Click to expand...

i started with a sigma 70-200 .. nothing wrong with third party or a good second hand lens....
 
Jonny breeze said:
Are lenses expensive to hire? It's going to be an ongoing thing but If they are cheap to hire would they be worth It? Never thought of that thx!
Click to expand...
Depends on lens and length of hire. If it's ongoing then purchase is best option imho. I have a couple of 2nd hand lenses, been very good, photography is a hobby so I can't justify expensive new lenses.
Just be a little careful with Sigma, sometimes the older ones don't work in certain cameras as they were reverse engineered and if you camera came out afterwards there were problems, purchase from a reputable dealer or someone off here who offers money back guarantee and you should be ok.
Matt
 
Last edited:
Jonny breeze said:
Hey,
I am interested in a telephoto lens for my Canon 5d Mark ii for sports photography (mainly rugby). I have looked at a few lenses and I am wondering if you could advise me which is the best or any other lenses. I am looking to buy the lens used and for preferably around £500. Below is the lenses I have considered and any questions with them. Many thanks Jonny.

Canon 70-200 f4L non is - does it have good enough reach?

Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 mark i
Canon 300 f4 prime
Sigma 150-600 & Tamron 150-600
Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6

Do these lenses let in enough light for daytime sports?
Click to expand...

I don't do Rugby photography - but a friend of mine does for a couple of South Wales teams. The simple answer is a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 or 2. A second body with a 70-200 F2.8 is handy for the closer shots if you can stretch to it.
 
Jonny breeze said:
used and for preferably around £500.
Click to expand...

johnf3f said:
I don't do Rugby photography - but a friend of mine does for a couple of South Wales teams. The simple answer is a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 or 2. A second body with a 70-200 F2.8 is handy for the closer shots if you can stretch to it.
Click to expand...

he has 500 quid and you suggest 5 thousand quids worth of gear ? the 300mm alone is about 3k or 5k+ if going for the mkii as you suggest
 
KIPAX said:
he has 500 quid and you suggest 5 thousand quids worth of gear ? the 300mm alone is about 3k or 5k+ if going for the mkii as you suggest
Click to expand...
He might have a £500 budget, but if you only read the thread title, the answer is 'the best'.
 
KIPAX said:
he has 500 quid and you suggest 5 thousand quids worth of gear ? the 300mm alone is about 3k or 5k+ if going for the mkii as you suggest
Click to expand...

Good point from Phil V!

However I did miss the £500 point - OOPS! Having said that a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 is nowhere near the 5K you quote even including a Canon 70-200 F2.8 L IS. How do I know this? Simply because I sold my Canon 70-200 F2.8 L IS (virtually unused) not too long ago and I have a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS up for grabs. £2200 and in very nice nik if you are interested.
 
andrewc said:
See if you can find a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. You should be able to get a non-IS/OS/VR version for your budget. I may be scruffy looking, but should perform OK.
Click to expand...


+1 but budget for a monopod unless you already have one these lenses are HEAVY.
 
DemiLion said:
Before using threads to try and flog your lens, you might want to practice your reading ability. Again.
Click to expand...

Err I mentioned the price of my lens as an illustration of values - remember at that time I had missed the £500 comment by the OP I was replying to the "Canon best telephoto sports lens" question. If I were really pushing to sell my lens wouldn't it be in the classifieds?

Having said that my specific recommendation was " Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 or 2" so I did not specifically "suggest" a Mk2 - I suggested two of , what I believe, to be the "Best" options for the OP to consider, given that they had asked for the "Best".

Looks to me like you too need to read more carefully! At least I freely admit when I get it wrong (which I did on the budget) - perhaps something to consider before posting? After all the OP can clearly see, by my comments, that I had missed the £500 budget (as mentioned above) so why on earth would you take umbrage about it?

I simply don't know where you are coming from!
 
johnf3f said:
Err I mentioned the price of my lens as an illustration of values - remember at that time I had missed the £500 comment by the OP I was replying to the "Canon best telephoto sports lens" question. If I were really pushing to sell my lens wouldn't it be in the classifieds?

Having said that my specific recommendation was " Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 or 2" so I did not specifically "suggest" a Mk2 - I suggested two of , what I believe, to be the "Best" options for the OP to consider, given that they had asked for the "Best".

Looks to me like you too need to read more carefully! At least I freely admit when I get it wrong (which I did on the budget) - perhaps something to consider before posting? After all the OP can clearly see, by my comments, that I had missed the £500 budget (as mentioned above) so why on earth would you take umbrage about it?

I simply don't know where you are coming from!
Click to expand...


You know what's laughable? That post falls down on two points:

1) You're trying to cover up the fact that Tony was on the nail when it came to your valuations.

2) A 300mm lens isn't even close to being 'the best' lens for Rugby, if you want to go down that route. It's far too short.
 
DemiLion said:
You know what's laughable? That post falls down on two points:

1) You're trying to cover up the fact that Tony was on the nail when it came to your valuations.

2) A 300mm lens isn't even close to being 'the best' lens for Rugby, if you want to go down that route. It's far too short.
Click to expand...

Err, then why do all the Rugby photographers that I know (more than a few) use or lust after 300 F2.8 lenses? But then what do the Welsh know about Rugby?

As to point No1, "cover up the fact that Tony was on the nail when it came to your valuations" - can't you read? Sorry I should have said WON'T you read?

Sorry DemiLion I really do not understand what your beef is. Please re-read my posts and if you still have a problem then I can only suggest that you calm down and/or seek advice.

Going further down this track will not help in the least - especially as far as the OP is concerned! Hence I will not entertain your ranting any further. I really do not understand what your problem is and this thread is not the place to discuss it so do not expect any more fuel for you fire from me. Sorry that you feel the way you do but I don't think that I am qualified to help.
 
I too would recommended looking for a used sigma 120-300 or 70-200. You'll need something at 2.8 for the 5dii to maintain focus.

Third party at this price range would make the most sense. I doubt a prime would be your best shot as a single lens option. If you had two cameras then a prime lens and a zoom would work great. Not the case here though.
 
johnf3f said:
Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 is nowhere near the 5K you quote.
Click to expand...

you miss quite a lot don't you :) I quoted 5k if you went for the mkii of the 300 as you suggested

as for the best with no budget then its a 400 and a 70-200 on two 1dxIIs :)
 
johnf3f said:
Err, then why do all the Rugby photographers that I know (more than a few) use or lust after 300 F2.8 lenses?
Click to expand...

because they cant afford the 400 they really need
 
the point of having two bodies and lens for field sports such as rugby or football is so you can cover both ends of the pitch.. thus the best option is a 400 and a 70-200 and the best sports camera for canon is 1dxII .. a 300 doesn't make it to the other goal line as good as a 400 does.. thus although usable the optimum lens is a 400

HOWEVER not everyone can get those.. I can because I do sports for a living and the work pays for the equipment and the equipment gets me the works..

.. if your photographing on a tighter budget and can only afford or wanr one lens/body then the 70-200 is ideal and versatile but will generally get you one side of the field. as someone else posted its also good use for lots of other photography where a 300 prime would be limiting... sigma is a good make and can be picked up at decent price

a sigma 120-300 is also a good choice and slightly longer but I found it needed a monopod for 2 hrs+ use.. younger fitter might not :)


PS All lens have good reasons to own and each person that owns one can enter a thread and say "I have this and its great because" .... well I have owned them all and my comments are based on average or usual use... I started with a sigma 70-200 then to sigma 120-300 then to canon 300 f4 prime then 300 2.8 prime.. then onto two bodies and worked up to the gear I have now.. I miss my 300 prime as it was perfect for ice hockey and junior football from the halfway line.. but it needed to go to fund the 400... other than that for field sports the 400 and 70-200 is bang on :)
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
you miss quite a lot don't you :) I quoted 5k if you went for the mkii of the 300 as you suggested

as for the best with no budget then its a 400 and a 70-200 on two 1dxIIs :)
Click to expand...
Not arguing or price pointing, just wondered why not the 200-400 and 70-200? Best of both worlds as you can have the 300 and 400?
 
KIPAX said:
then the 70-200 is ideal and versatile but will generally get you one side of the field. :)
Click to expand...

And presumably during summer months or bright winters days you could use an extender to get a bit more work and then build up to a proper 400?
Thereby keeping costs down initially (as requested by OP) until the work pays for the kit (assuming you are selling stuff and not an amateur.
Matt
 
KIPAX said:
the point of having two bodies and lens for field sports such as rugby or football is so you can cover both ends of the pitch.. thus the best option is a 400 and a 70-200 and the best sports camera for canon is 1dxII .. a 300 doesn't make it to the other goal line as good as a 400 does.. thus although usable the optimum lens is a 400

HOWEVER not everyone can get those.. I can because I do sports for a living and the work pays for the equipment and the equipment gets me the works..

.. if your photographing on a tighter budget and can only afford or wanr one lens/body then the 70-200 is ideal and versatile but will generally get you one side of the field. as someone else posted its also good use for lots of other photography where a 300 prime would be limiting... sigma is a good make and can be picked up at decent price

a sigma 120-300 is also a good choice and slightly longer but I found it needed a monopod for 2 hrs+ use.. younger fitter might not :)


PS All lens have good reasons to own and each person that owns one can enter a thread and say "I have this and its great because" .... well I have owned them all and my comments are based on average or usual use... I started with a sigma 70-200 then to sigma 120-300 then to canon 300 f4 prime then 300 2.8 prime.. then onto two bodies and worked up to the gear I have now.. I miss my 300 prime as it was perfect for ice hockey and junior football from the halfway line.. but it needed to go to fund the 400... other than that for field sports the 400 and 70-200 is bang on :)
Click to expand...

Spot on analysis.

The only point that I'd differ on is that I prefer a 500mm f/4 for rugby (on a 1Dx), as it gives me a deeper reach.
 
johnf3f said:
Good point from Phil V!

However I did miss the £500 point - OOPS! Having said that a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 is nowhere near the 5K you quote even including a Canon 70-200 F2.8 L IS. How do I know this? Simply because I sold my Canon 70-200 F2.8 L IS (virtually unused) not too long ago and I have a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS up for grabs. £2200 and in very nice nik if you are interested.
Click to expand...

I might be interested in your lens John if you still have it..
 
Danny Payne said:
I might be interested in your lens John if you still have it..
Click to expand...
johnf3f said:
Yes I still have it!
I have sent you a PM.
Click to expand...
We have rules in place for a reason,
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/help/classifieds/
I suggest you both go back, and read them
especially the bits that say
  • You can only use the classifieds if you are an established member.*
  • No trading anywhere except for the classifieds.
  • All discussion about the item(s) must be done on the thread. No discussions elsewhere until a deal is agreed.

* Established Member
This shows that you've settled in properly as a member on Talk Photography. You will be awarded this when you make just 25 posts and have been a member for 30 days. Once you reach this level you can access all our restricted forums (Classifieds etc).
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
We have rules in place for a reason,
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/help/classifieds/
I suggest you both go back, and read them
especially the bits that say
  • You can only use the classifieds if you are an established member.*
  • No trading anywhere except for the classifieds.
  • All discussion about the item(s) must be done on the thread. No discussions elsewhere until a deal is agreed.

* Established Member
This shows that you've settled in properly as a member on Talk Photography. You will be awarded this when you make just 25 posts and have been a member for 30 days. Once you reach this level you can access all our restricted forums (Classifieds etc).
Click to expand...

Apologies! I wanted to send some contact details that I would prefer to be reasonably private. Also I thought that discussing a potential sale would distract from the OP's original request - hence my option for a private message.
This is the normal practice on other photography forums, hence my actions here.

Sorry if I have tread on any toes - not my intention.

Given the poster's potential interest, how should I reply without taking the thread off subject? Advice would be appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top