advertisement


[WTD] Suitable Canon EF lens for sports

mjhill1234

pfm Member
I am looking for a sensibly priced lens thats suitable for taking picutres of my son playing football. I have a Canon 6D and have been lusting after the 100-400mm L series which seems to range from silly low price to mega high! I really want to spend under £400 ideally and don't mind if its battered as long as it takes nice photos :) I am based just outside of Bicester in Oxfordshire. Any suggestions welcome!

Thanks
 
You have the right choice, just the wrong budget.
2 versions, original and Mk 2. I have owned both, the original for 8 years. The Mk 2 is in a different league, hence the price, but the original is still a good choice although you will be extremely lucky to get an L lens of that length within budget.
You could look out for an early Sigma 50-500, excellent value for money and good IQ, albeit not quite as good as the Canon L lenses.
 
You have the right choice, just the wrong budget.
2 versions, original and Mk 2. I have owned both, the original for 8 years. The Mk 2 is in a different league, hence the price, but the original is still a good choice although you will be extremely lucky to get an L lens of that length within budget.
You could look out for an early Sigma 50-500, excellent value for money and good IQ, albeit not quite as good as the Canon L lenses.

Thank you, I almost bid on one last night that ended up a £515 but I stopped myself :)…. Will take a look at the sigma thanks for the suggestion.
 
I had the Sigma from new for a couple of years, until an oik tried to steal camera and lens out of a backpack at an Ashes cricket match, during a rain break and it fell to the floor! Insurance to the rescue but bought the Canon lens to replace it.
 
I think the first thing you have to decide is how much reach you really need, and whether you are going to benefit from image stabilisation. If you decide you can live without image stabilisation (say, you will have enough light to keep at 1/500th, which to be fair isn't hard these days with the sort of high ISO performance modern cameras can offer, and the fact you want to freeze action) then you have a number of other options to consider.

First up, sigma made some great 70-200 f/2.8 lenses without image stabilisation which will produce great results. Given they are f/2.8 you can add a 1.4x or 2.0x extender to give more reach, and so you get two useful lenses for the price of 1...

The other option you should investigate would be the 300 f/4 IS prime, but it's probably out of your budget. It's a great lens though.
 
I think the first thing you have to decide is how much reach you really need, and whether you are going to benefit from image stabilisation. If you decide you can live without image stabilisation (say, you will have enough light to keep at 1/500th, which to be fair isn't hard these days with the sort of high ISO performance modern cameras can offer, and the fact you want to freeze action) then you have a number of other options to consider.

First up, sigma made some great 70-200 f/2.8 lenses without image stabilisation which will produce great results. Given they are f/2.8 you can add a 1.4x or 2.0x extender to give more reach, and so you get two useful lenses for the price of 1...

The other option you should investigate would be the 300 f/4 IS prime, but it's probably out of your budget. It's a great lens though.

Thank you some great suggestions, should have posted in the main forums in hindsight rather than classifieds :)
 
I have a sigma 120-400mm f4.5 to 5.6 OS which I am looking to sell.
Asking £250 plus postage
Collection and demo welcome near Cardiff area.
Thanks Martin
 
I have a sigma 120-400mm f4.5 to 5.6 OS which I am looking to sell.
Asking £250 plus postage
Collection and demo welcome near Cardiff area.
Thanks Martin

Thank you Martin, I have literally just come back form picking up a 70-200 2.8L (non-is) which I got for silly money although I may have rushed into it a little as on reading it appears this model can be a bit temperamental with a 2x extender :)..... really good price for your sigma as well!

Matt
 
Sounds like a good option. I think any problems with a 2x extender might be related to certain lower bodies not being up to the task, and since you have a modern high quality body you'll probably find it's absolutely fine. I'd personally go 1.4x and crop if necessary, but it all comes down to taste at that point.
 
Sounds like a good option. I think any problems with a 2x extender might be related to certain lower bodies not being up to the task, and since you have a modern high quality body you'll probably find it's absolutely fine. I'd personally go 1.4x and crop if necessary, but it all comes down to taste at that point.

Taking some sample shots yesterday I am very happy :) I think you are right about going for a 1.4x - the Kenko ones seem to have good reviews and a fair chunk cheaper than the canon one but thats the next challenge/decision!
 
Taking some sample shots yesterday I am very happy :) I think you are right about going for a 1.4x - the Kenko ones seem to have good reviews and a fair chunk cheaper than the canon one but thats the next challenge/decision!

don’t get a non canon extender. They’re horrific. They don’t send proper lens information to the body. The canon ones actually report correct focal length and aperture back to the body. They’re also optically superior. The last gen 1.4x can be had cheaply enough. Dont short change an L lens with a shitty Extender
 
don’t get a non canon extender. They’re horrific. They don’t send proper lens information to the body. The canon ones actually report correct focal length and aperture back to the body. They’re also optically superior. The last gen 1.4x can be had cheaply enough. Dont short change an L lens with a shitty Extender

In which case that narrows my search :D
 


advertisement


Back
Top