First post, same old lens question...

[onel0126]

First of all, amazing forum--have learned so much just reading posts. I shoot alot of my kid's sporting events and shoot both handheld and with a monopod. Mostly all outside. This weekend, I am taking the plunge and purchasing my first L lense--either the 70-200 f4 IS OR the 70-200 f2.8 Non IS. I have other IS lenses and am mostly pleased with them but don't know in this situation if I should sacrifice exposure for IS. The 2.8 IS is not an option right now. Thanks in advance.

Bill

[Nikolas]

you answered your own question.

[fWord]

Tough question. On the one hand it may be argued that you are shooting outdoors where there will often be sufficient light. Also, if you're looking to freeze action then you'll naturally be using shutter speeds that are sufficient enough to reduce the risk of camera shake.

But the f/4, with its IS will make a better all-rounder lens. It will do your outdoor action shots (in good light, or at higher ISOs) plus static/ slow action shots in low light without a tripod. In low light it can also be used for an artistic rendition of action and motion blur.

It's a difficult choice between the two. But I'd pick the f/4 IS if I were in your shoes.

[jacobsen1]

You need shutter speed and IS doesn't help there.
Non IS f2.8, case closed.

Ben

[ronmayhew]

You need the f/2.8 in fading light for sports.

I use the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. When darkness falls I find myself switching to the 135 f/2L, 85 f/1.8, or 100 f/2.

[calicokat]

70-200 F/2.8L is my vote