What lens for xTi and youth soccer

rdenichilo

My Canon 75-300 IS is dying, and I am considering replacing it. Have a series of questions for everyone:

1. What lenses (in a comparable price range as L series is out of budget) do others recommend to go with my xTi?

2. Is the IS really needed for outdoor youth soccer?

3. Any significant difference in the Canon 75-300 IS and non-IS versions (other than price)

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Randyjk

rdenichilo wrote:

My Canon 75-300 IS is dying, and I am considering replacing it. Have a series of questions for everyone:

1. What lenses (in a comparable price range as L series is out of budget) do others recommend to go with my xTi?

2. Is the IS really needed for outdoor youth soccer?

3. Any significant difference in the Canon 75-300 IS and non-IS versions (other than price)

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Your cheapest yet highest quality zoom solution would be either the 70-300 IS or the 70-200 F4. The 70-200 F4 might be a hair sharper and better contrast than the 70-300, although the 70-300 is not as sharp at 300 as it is at 200. You could get either used for about $500. I wouldn't get a lesser lens; exception being the 200 2.8 which isn't much cheaper and can be found for a lot more than $500 to boot. I realize these lenses are more than your current lens but its well worth stepping up.

Any of these lenses would be a great improvement over your current lens. IS won't buy you much with action sports where you generally want fast shutter speeds.

BlueHoseJacket

rden,

I had the 75-300 which I had bought about 8 years ago to work on my old film version Canon Rebel. I stepped up to the Canon Rebel Digital XT about 2 years ago. This past summer I dropped my 75-300 in the river . Needinf to replace the lost lense, I looked at the two lenses that Randy suggested..the 75-300 IS and the 70-200 L f/4. I ended up buying the 70-200 L f/4.0. I really like the lense, but I miss the reach of the 300. With the 70-200...I seem to have amore difficult time getting a really sharp picture while handholding. At times I wished I had tried the 70-300 IS...with my limited experience..I'm wondering if the IS would have help me during handheld shots. In addition the 70-200 L requires a new collar for using a tripod..another $100.

RustingInPeace

rdenichilo wrote:

My Canon 75-300 IS is dying, and I am considering replacing it. Have a series of questions for everyone:

1. What lenses (in a comparable price range as L series is out of budget) do others recommend to go with my xTi?

2. Is the IS really needed for outdoor youth soccer?

3. Any significant difference in the Canon 75-300 IS and non-IS versions (other than price)

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

You might also want to take a look at the Tamron 28-300. I know most people have a knee jerk reaction to Tamron as being "cheap", but the pictures my friend is delivering has me thinking of adding it to my bag (we both shoot the xti).

Just my 2 cents worth.

kenyahudson

As others have mentioned, the 70-300 f/4.0-f/5.6 IS is a good choice. The quality of the lens is considered better than the 75-300 III series and there is added value in the image stabilization. It is a bit over budget, but the 75-300mm is Canon's lowest priced telephoto zoom series. The IS is not necessary for outdoor youth soccer. In most cases, you will shoot at shutter speeds (i.e. 1/500 or higher) that would minimize the effects of camera shake. However, the IS becomes important if you also would like to employ the lens for other uses handheld like team photos, individual photos or non-sports subjects.

rdenichilo

Thanks for all the input. I am going to look at the 70-300 IS, but does anyone else have info on the Tameron?

rdenichilo

Ok, pulled the trigger on the 70-300 IS. I'll post some pics later this weekend. Hopefully we'll get some good shots.

rdenichilo

Soccer Saturday
Here are just a few from this weekend with the new lens. A little bit of post done, but not much. What do you think?

rdenichilo

Bump
Any feed back on how to improve those shots? They are some samples with the new lens.

kini62

Looks good to me. Only the 2 with mulitple players in them would look better cropped in tight around the ball handler and opponent.

As for the lens it looks to be nice and sharp.

If it were me (and it was not:D ) I would've went for a used Sigma 70-200/2.8.

Youth soccer seems to always have crappy backgrounds and the 2.8 aperture would help eliminate some of it.

Good shots though, better than I got last fall with my old camera.

Looking forward to next month when I can use my 30d for the first time for sports (sort of- U5 girls )

gene

rdenichilo

kini62 wrote:

Looks good to me. Only the 2 with mulitple players in them would look better cropped in tight around the ball handler and opponent.

As for the lens it looks to be nice and sharp. The sigma was just out of budget range at the moment.

If it were me (and it was not:D ) I would've went for a used Sigma 70-200/2.8.

Youth soccer seems to always have crappy backgrounds and the 2.8 aperture would help eliminate some of it.

Good shots though, better than I got last fall with my old camera.

Looking forward to next month when I can use my 30d for the first time for sports (sort of- U5 girls )

gene

I agree that cropping in tighter would help those shots. While the lens is sharp, I did sharpen them in elements (unsharp mask 150, 1.9, 1)

Any other suggestions on how to sharpen the action but blur the background?

johng

sharpness is good. Action is good. But backgrounds are killing you. You have 2 choices:

1. Select better spots to shoot from if they exist where the background won't be spectators or cars.

2. Shoot as much at full zoom as possible with the lens wide open.

Otherwise I think you're doing a really good job!!

RandySmugMug

rdenichilo wrote:

Any feed back on how to improve those shots? They are some samples with the new lens.

those are very good
crop tighter and shoot wide open to blur the backgrounds (the backgrounds are not bad as is)

gus

RandySmugMug wrote:

those are very good
crop tighter and shoot wide open to blur the backgrounds (the backgrounds are not bad as is)

Same for me if i was asked to critique. What F stop did you use ?

rdenichilo

gus wrote:

Same for me if i was asked to critique. What F stop did you use ?

Most are shot at 5.6, which is the widest this lens goes when fully zoomed (Canon 70-300 IS).

I really appreciate the feedback. Its very encouraging.

One more question. Would upgrading the body (currently xTi) improve image quality of these types of shots? I am specifically interested in color and contrast.

mercphoto

rdenichilo wrote:

Any feed back on how to improve those shots? They are some samples with the new lens.

Watch your backgrounds, they are busy and unattractive. That's part of the beauty of f/2.8 glass -- you open up the aperture all the way and the backgrounds go much more blurred than you can get with the lens you have.

Given you said your budget didn't allow a better lens your best other alternative is to be very selective with where you take the pictures from.

mercphoto

rdenichilo wrote:

One more question. Would upgrading the body (currently xTi) improve image quality of these types of shots? I am specifically interested in color and contrast.

For color and constrast improvements? Doubtful the body would help too much there. Your xTI has in-camera settings for color and contrast you know... Learn to use those. Or shoot RAW and adjust that in Photoshop later.

Will a new body help? In other ways it will help a lot. A 1-series has a larger sensor which will lower your depth of field, which will help some. It has substantially auto-focus and tracking which will also help, especially when shooting wide-open. But you really need a better lens. Sorry, but you can't skimp on glass.

rdenichilo

mercphoto wrote:

For color and constrast improvements? Doubtful the body would help too much there. Your xTI has in-camera settings for color and contrast you know... Learn to use those. Or shoot RAW and adjust that in Photoshop later.

Will a new body help? In other ways it will help a lot. A 1-series has a larger sensor which will lower your depth of field, which will help some. It has substantially auto-focus and tracking which will also help, especially when shooting wide-open. But you really need a better lens. Sorry, but you can't skimp on glass.

Thanks for the comments. They help. I am asking because while I could not get the better lens this time, I am planning for the next upgrade. With next set of sales I am trying to decide which is the better route, body or glass? My thought would be glass, and it looks like that is what you would also recommend. But I wanted to better understand what benefit would a new body give me.

RandySmugMug

rdenichilo wrote:

Thanks for the comments. They help. I am asking because while I could not get the better lens this time, I am planning for the next upgrade. With next set of sales I am trying to decide which is the better route, body or glass? My thought would be glass, and it looks like that is what you would also recommend. But I wanted to better understand what benefit would a new body give me.

i'd upgrade the lens before the body
the 70-200 2.8 non IS is a good deal and a very good lens