Comments on equipment upgrade plan

[xtrpureguts]

Just got into photography with the purchase of the 300D last December. Have been quite active with a focus on sports. Have taken about 13,000 shots during that time. Have accumulated the following equipment since then:

Canon 50mm / f1.4
Canon EFS 18-55mm Kit Lens
Sigma EX 24-70mm / f2.8
Sigma EX 70-200mm / f2.8
Sigma EX 1.4 Tele Converter
Mono-pod

I've convinced myself that I really enjoy this and am prepared to upgrade a bit. My plan is to continue to take pictures for fun and share with the parents of my daughters teammates. 75% of pictures taken are indoor basketball without a flash. Grammar Schools and High Schools. Have also expanded to Softball and Lacrosse. Hope to shoot some soccer this fall. Anyway, my biggest problem has been getting a fast shutter speed with the poor lighting in the gyms we frequent. I was considering the following upgrade path. Please provide some feedback.

Sell the Sigma 70-200 and replace with Canon 70-200 L IS f2.8
(Should let me shoot with a slightly lower shutter speed)
Add the Sigma EX 120-300 f2.8 for the outdoor sports
Add 20D keeping 300D with short lens attached to get close in action
(Hoping the AF improvements and better high ISO performance will yield a higher percentage of keepers)
Add 580 EX Flash
Add 1Gig Fast Compact flash card

I'm guessing that’s about a $5,500 outlay after the sale of the Sigma 70-200. It will certainly leave me in better shape than I am now. But, for a heavy sports shooter, is this the best use of my funds? Thanks....Don

[nosquare2003]

Anyway, my biggest problem has been getting a fast shutter speed with the poor lighting in the gyms we frequent.

Sell the Sigma 70-200 and replace with Canon 70-200 L IS f2.8
(Should let me shoot with a slightly lower shutter speed)



:?:

[xtrpureguts]

Sorry about not being clear. I usually have the lens wide open due to the poor lighting. In order to get a sharp handheld picture I sometimes increase the ISO to get a faster shutter speed. I was hoping the IS on the Canon lens would allow me to get a sharp picture with a lower shutter speed and lower ISO producing a less grainy / noisy result. Hope that isn't more confusing.

[nosquare2003]

How slow can you hold your 200mm Sigma lens? What shutter speed will you intend to use with the IS lens? Well, I wonder if IS helps in this case...

[Panza]

If you're going to go with slower shutter speeds than what you can get now with the Sigma f/2.8 on a monopod I imagine that you will get to the point where all the players you shoot will be unsharp because they move, not because of camera movement.
I realize that you should have some form of tele lens but for indoor sports I think the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L lens will serve you quite well.
It will improve shutter speed and hand-hold-ability a lot. You will have an effective 136mm lens. I have been shooting bike races with my 50mm with good results. You might have to do a bit more cropping but I think you will get more good shots with the 85mm.
It is $1500 at B&H: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=12181&is=USA

[MrKickalot]

Add the Sigma EX 120-300 f2.8 for the outdoor sports



Just a thought.... Since this is going to be your outdoor sports lens why don't you look at a Sigma 100-300 f4.0. It has been praised a lot on here!! The sports you mentioned are daylight sports. The 120-300 is $2300 on B&H v/s the 100-300 is $900.

Just a thought... $1400 could almost buy you a second 20D!!

Have fun spending money!!

[CyberDyneSystems]

but for indoor sports I think the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L lens will serve you quite well....

Actually the 85mm f/1.2 is a fantastic lens by all accounts.. BUT it is a dog for sports.. the AF is the slowest you can find in a "L" prime.. and the f/1.2 DOF is so shallow (not to mention the fact that it isn't long enough 90% of the time)

This lens would be a very expensive proposition for a use it was not intended.

Now the 135mm f/2 on the other hand.. :)


As for the Sigma 100-300mm f/4.. it is a great lens.. but the 120-300mm f/2.8 is a lot better, and DEFINATELY more appropriate for action/sports :)

[Olegis]

As for the Sigma 100-300mm f/4.. it is a great lens.. but the 120-300mm f/2.8 is a lot better, and DEFINATELY more appropriate for action/sports :)

It's also about 2.5 times more expensive than the 100-300 f/4. I would go for the 100-300 f/4 for outdoor sports / wildlife (as a matter of fact I have already started to save money for some telephoto lens, and this one is very high in my list), or the 85mm f/1.8 for indoor / other poor lighting situations. It's a function of your distance to the subject - with 100-300 you can be a LOT farther than with 85 ... If you can get close enough - the 85mm f/1.8 will be all you'll ever need.

[gillyworld]

If you are getting the 70-200 f2.8 IS lens, then you could consider getting the 1.4X canon matched converter which will give you a 98-280 f4.0 lens with IS. The Canon 1.4 converter gives excellent results with this lens. Then you could also consider the Canon 100-400 lens which is excellent for outside sports and is also compatible with the 1.4x converter if you really want to go long.

Alan

[xtrpureguts]

Thanks for the feedback.

First off, being a rookie at both photography and posting, I have caused confusion about my desired shutter speed. I strive to get a shutter speed faster than 1/320 when shooting indoor basketball. Unfortunately, in the local gym's I frequent, I am lucky to get a shutter speed of 1/160 at f2.8 and 800 ISO. I'm a bit shakey at the 1/160 speed and hoped the IS lens would help with that.

I am intrigued by the idea of getting the Canon 135 f 2.0, the Sigma 100-300 f4.0 and the Canon 1.4x converter instead of the Sigma 120-300. Is it a bad idea to use the Sigma 1.4x with the Canon 70-200? Do you need the Canon converter to keep the IS working?

So, the 20D, Flash and Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS selections are set. Now I need to decide on the last lens choice. I've been thinking about that sigma 120-300 for a while. Thanks again for your comments....Don

[Olegis]

1/160 will not freeze a fast moving subject, except, maybe, at the "peak action point", where the movement nearly stops. You'll need something like 1/250s for that - only fast lenses (f/1.8 or faster) can give you these shutter speeds in low light conditions.
I would go with ISO 1600 and a faster shutter - the results will be a little bit noisier, but you'll get the shot.