Need some advice

philbm900

Hi, I just started taking sports photography and I needed some advice...

I have a Cano Eos Rebel XSI with the stock lens.

I wanted to get a new lenses for sports photography.

I mainly shot paintball, motocross, snowboarding, mostly xtreme sports..

I ask around and people told me that i should either get the Canon ef 70-200mm f4 USM or the f2.8 USM

Which one do you guys think i should get?

Will I see a very big difference between my stock lens compared to these two lenses

At most of the events i dont have a tripod as i need to take pictures quickly at fast moving subjects..

Its mostly sunny but sometimes it rain ....

Also I am using adobe lightroom to edit my pictures. Any other program that is easy and good?

I am new to photography so please dont go with like crazy terms

thanks

craig_d

The standard kit lens with the Rebel XSi is an 18-55mm, so the 70-200mm doesn't even overlap it in focal length. They're very different lenses.

The kit lens goes from wide-angle to mild telephoto. It's a pretty decent lens by consumer kit standards, but nothing all that special. It can't take fast exposures, especially when zoomed in, due to the narrow maximum aperture of f/3.5-5.6. This pretty much dooms it as a sports lens, since sports shooting is all about catching fast action without blur.

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM is a superb, pro-quality telephoto lens with a faster maximum aperture. This is a popular lens for sports shooting. It comes in two versions: one with Image Stabilization (IS) and one without. The IS version costs about $500 more and is noticeably heavier. Personally, I like IS, but I know some sports shooters who say you don't need it for sports because the main benefit of IS is that it allows you to shoot hand-held with longer exposures, whereas with sports you're mostly trying for very short exposures. Of course, once you have the lens you may find many uses for it other than sports.

The 70-200 f/4 is also a good lens, but it's a full stop slower than the f/2.8 version. It also is available in IS and non-IS versions. If you can afford the f/2.8 (either version) I think that's preferable to the f/4.

philbm900

Will the 2.8 be super heavy?

I will not be using a tripod during the events...

craig_d

philbm900 wrote:

Will the 2.8 be super heavy?

I will not be using a tripod during the events...

Depends what you're comfortable with. I've never had a problem with the f/2.8 IS (the heaviest model), but I've never tried holding it up continuously for an hour either.

Here are the weights of the four 70-200 models, extracted from a review at the-digital-picture.com:

24.9 oz - 70-200 f/4
26.8 oz - 70-200 f/4 IS
42.2 oz - 70-200 f/2.8
51.9 oz - 70-200 f/2.8 IS

So the f/2.8 IS is a bit more than double the weight of the f/4 without IS, as well as about an inch longer and $1000 more expensive. The f/2.8 without IS is nearly 10 oz lighter than the IS version and $500 or so cheaper.

austinado16

Outside in those conditions? I'm not sure I'd throw a $1,000 or a $2,000 lens into that fray. Especially on an XSi body.

I think I'd pick up a used Canon 70-210 F4, or similar, on the cheap. That way, when it gets dirty, wet, banged around, etc., I wouldn't be freaking out that I was ruining my $2,000 piece of glass.

MX-ActionShots

Pick up yourself a used Sigma 70-200 f2.8, well under the price of the Canon version, and you have the f2.8 if ya need it.

I have the XSi body with the Sigma lens for MX, and other sports, and it works just fine!!

Gringriff

I bought the 70-200 L f/2.8 Non-IS while still using the XSi and I must say it is my favorite lens. I use it for just about everything except indoor birthday parties.

I too started with the XSi and kit lens last fall. Then I bought some primes because I needed higher apertures for indoor basketball. Finally, as the soccer season approached I wanted more reach and went for the 70-200 (along with 1.4x) and have never regretted it one second.

My thoughts were that I was building a set of gear and figured this lens should last through several body upgrades. If you are always shooting outdoor sports then the f/4 may be the way to go. But as stated above you may decide you use it indoors and for other things such as portraits etc...

Do I wish I had gotten the IS? Once in a while - like during a concert at our church without flash. But most of my shots have been sports and I've heard that it doesn't really help and it does add weight and cost, so I am very happy.

As far as the weight, it is considerably more heavy than the kit lens but not bad for a little while. However, I highly recommend using a monopod if your going to be shooting and holding the camera and lens up to your face for several hours.

Also, as the previous post suggested i would strongly consider the third party 2.8 lens along with the Canon f/4 if you don't want to spend the extra for Canon's f/2.8.

Good luck with your choice.

MK Productions

philbm900 wrote:

Will the 2.8 be super heavy?

I will not be using a tripod during the events...

I have the Rebel XTI and take U18 / U19 soccer pictures during the day and HS football pictures at night.

I bought the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM. I too wanted something to grow with and didn't want to regret not getting all the options.

I do use a monopod for football games but soccer just doesn't work. Too quick of movements - so yes - I hold it for 2 1/2 hours during the game. I'm glad when halftime hits to give me a 10 min rest and then I am going again.

It is heavy but it is the price I am willing to pay for some really great shots that other wise I would not be able to get.

IdahoMotomom

MX-ActionShots wrote:

Pick up yourself a used Sigma 70-200 f2.8, well under the price of the Canon version, and you have the f2.8 if ya need it.

I have the XSi body with the Sigma lens for MX, and other sports, and it works just fine!!

I had the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 on Rebel XT and it did the job. But, I wanted better shots and finally just upgraded to a lightly used Canon 1D, Mark II N. There is a remarkable difference in the speed of the focus and the 8.5 fps.

It's heavy, no doubt about it. My left wrist was so sore after the first day of shooting three soccer games. (I'm not all that sturdy at 5'2" and 120 lbs) I bought a monopod, but haven't gotten the hang of using it yet. I've only shot soccer with it so far but my images are already getting better! Cannot wait until soccer season is over on Saturday and we can get out to the motocross track to start shooting that again. (We're lucky we get to ride/race all year long

My recommendation, get your glass first then move to a better body. Your kit lenses will do nothing on a pro body.

rainbow

The first lens I bought after my kit was the 70 - 200 f/4. I used it for middle school track meets and absolutely loved the results. I had the Rebel XT and it felt perfect in my hands (the f/2.8 will likely feel unbalanced) and blew me away with the pics.

You can buy this new at just over $600 and used for about $500. At half the price AND half the weight of the f/2.8, I would recommend this move. The f/2.8 aperture can be ignored at this point of your experience (useful on occasions, but so is $600 in your pocket for your next upgrade). This will leave funds available for other lenses as you improve your experience and determine what other lenses will help you (there is a whole world of prime lenses out there!). Down the road you can choose to sell this lens and recover most or all of your money.

borrowlenses.com

In general a 200mm lens can be hand held quite easily. It seems big at first but after a bit of time with it you will not have any issues hoisting it for a spell.

And if you ever decide to experiment with some really long glass, the 70-200 will feel amazingly light in comparison.

As for F4 versus F2.8, if you're going to be outside in the sun the F4 lens will be fine. The difference is that whereas an F2.8 lens will be sharpest at F4 or F5.6, the F4 lens will have to be at 5.6 or F8 to be equally sharper, so that one stop you lose continues throughout the aperture range.

The price difference between the two makes the F4 version pretty hard to pass up though!

insanefred

For paint ball:

If you are just doing out door speed ball fields, pretty much any tele-zoom will work.
For more (forest like Oregon environment) mil-sim events, you'll need a 2.8 glass.

For those who think the 70-200 2.8 lenses are heavy for event work... They need to start working out.

IdahoMotomom

insanefred wrote:

For those who think the 70-200 2.8 lenses are heavy for event work... They need to start working out.

I do work out Throwing up over 6 pounds of body/lens throughout the day at the soccer fields or motocross, does wear me out. And, I am usually shooting between riding my own 10-15 minute motos throughout a practice day at the track.

insanefred

IdahoMotomom wrote:

I do work out Throwing up over 6 pounds of body/lens throughout the day at the soccer fields or motocross, does wear me out. And, I am usually shooting between riding my own 10-15 minute motos throughout a practice day at the track.

You should really come out with me and shoot an airsoft skirm for a day. That will break you in.

rainbow

insanefred wrote:

For paint ball:

If you are just doing out door speed ball fields, pretty much any tele-zoom will work.
For more (forest like Oregon environment) mil-sim events, you'll need a 2.8 glass.

For those who think the 70-200 2.8 lenses are heavy for event work... They need to start working out.

There is a significant weight difference between the f/4 and f/2.8. It is not a matter of strength but a definite consideration for someone currently shooting with one of the lightest weight combinations in the Canon line. People rarely complain that a lens is too light, but they do sell lenses because they are too heavy to wield for long shooting sessions.

IdahoMotomom

insanefred wrote:

You should really come out with me and shoot an airsoft skirm for a day. That will break you in.

Thanks but I'll stick to riding my motocross bike and focusing on hitting the tabletops and the occassional double! I have to keep pushing myself because my 9 year old daughter will be whipping my butt before long and kicking me off my 150RB when she gets the chance.