Please recommend a 100-300L or 100-400mm L lens

[Kirik]

Hi,

I have around $900 to spend on a good long-range lens. I shoot a lot of martial arts events and I'd like to have a good "L" series cannon lens in the 300 to 400mm range with image stabilization (IS).

Could someone please recommend some model #'s? Thanks

P.S. I know $900 doesn't sound like much, but I'll be buying it off ebay used.

[velvetjones]

You might be able to get a used 100-400L on ebay for $900....but you would be lucky....or there would be something little that is wrong with it. They typically go used for about $1200 on ebay.....but it is a really good lens.

[neil_r]

If you are shooting mostly indoors you may find the 70-200 2.8 L will be better as the speed may prove more useful than the extra range.

N

[Kirik]

Thanks for the info guys.

ONe other dumb question I can't figure out. I've noticed some lenses say "2.8L" and others say "3.5-5.6L" what does that mean? how come on the first one there isn't a range, and just a fixed #? Thanks

[FlipsidE]

I can answer the first part of your latest questions. Those numbers you listed are the apertures of the lenses. My *guess* on the second question is that the first lens has a fixed aperture while the second lens has a variable aperture. But, that's just a guess.

FlipsidE

[JoeTampa]

A lens that has is spec'd at f/2.8 has a maximum aperture of 2.8 across the entire focal range of the lens. One that is spec'd at 3.5/5.6 has a maximum aperture of 3.5 at the wide end, and 5.6 at the telephoto end.

Thus, for example, the Canon 70-200L f/2.8 has a maximum aperture of 2.8 from 70 through 200mm. The 100-400L f/3.5-5.6 has a maximum aperture of 3.5 at 100mm and 5.6 at 400mm.


- Joe

[Kirik]

Ah! Thanks Joe...

[Scottes]

I don't think you'd be happy shooting martial arts with an f/5.6 lens - that's a full 2 stops difference from f/2.8, thus the difference between 1/125 and 1/500 shutter. I think you'll want closer to 1/500, or at least the choice to do so.

I highly recommend the Canon 70-200 L f/2.8, but it's about $1150 I think - which is about $300 cheaper than the Canon 100-400 L IS. The 70-200 also AFs much faster than the 100-400. And 200mm should be sufficient unless you're at an event in the cheap seats.

[JLS Photo]

Why is Image Stabilization important for this application? If you are shooting martial arts, you need a fast shutter speed; thus, IS is irrelevant.

:?: :?:

[Headcase650]

the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex hsm is 800 bucks then toss in a 1.4 converter and you would be right on target with your budget. this lense gets awsome reviews. I know its not an "L" but if you must have one now youve got the money.

[Meathook Jones]

Why is Image Stabilization important for this application? If you are shooting martial arts, you need a fast shutter speed; thus, IS is irrelevant.

:?: :?:

Because I'll be movnig around and can't lug a tripod around... have to take shots on the run.

[tofuboy]

I'm not sure how the lighting will be where you will be using the lens, but for less than decent lighting, f/5.6 is simply too slow to stop movement. If you want IS, I think the best lens would be the 70-200 f/2.8L IS... but that's quite a bit out of your budget range. I guess it depends on how the lighting will be whether the 100-400 will work for you. If from what I've seen on tv, martial arts venues are pretty well lit, so it may be fine... maybe go to a store and try one out in some lighting that will be similar to the venue (or as close to it as possible).

[Kirik]

I'm not sure how the lighting will be where you will be using the lens, but for less than decent lighting, f/5.6 is simply too slow to stop movement.

Excuse the ignornace, but how does the aperture affect the speed of capturing movement - I thought shutter speed determined that?

[Jonny]

I'm not sure how the lighting will be where you will be using the lens, but for less than decent lighting, f/5.6 is simply too slow to stop movement.

Excuse the ignornace, but how does the aperture affect the speed of capturing movement - I thought shutter speed determined that?

The shutter speed does determine how well you freeze movement BUT if you shoot with a fast shutter speed and you only have a small aperture you will not get enough light through the lens to expose a nice picture and all your shots will be dark. To get better shots you will have to slow down your shutter speed to compensate and this will not freeze the movement.

Imagine your aperture as a door way and your shutter speed is the amount of time in which the door is open. If you have a narrow doorway not many people will get through in say 5 seconds. However if you have a large doorway many more will get through in the same 5 seconds.
In this example the light is represented by the people and you need plenty of light getting through indoors!

Does this makes sense?

[Kirik]

yes that makes sense; so basically you want a lense with the largest aperture range?

[BrandonSi]

yes that makes sense; so basically you want a lense with the largest aperture range?

Sort of.. You want a lens with a larger aperture (or smaller f stop number.) The min. f/stop for the 2.8L zoom is 1:2.8 througouth the entire range of the lens, so the difference between the largest apertures through the total focal range is zero, which is not a very big range..

basically you want a lens that has the largest aperture for the focal length you want to commonly shoot at.

Lenses are commonly denoted by the smallest f stop at a given focal range (usually the smallest and largest focal lengths), since that's the hard part (and what makes them more expensive).. getting a larger fstop (smaller aperture) on any given lens is easy.

If you're having trouble visualizing the aperture process, here's a good animated gif of it.
http://www.dcviews.com/tutors/tt51010.htm

[cc10d]

"Because I'll be movnig around and can't lug a tripod around... have to take shots on the run."


IS is good at helping hand held shooting, but does nothing to stop the action at the subject end of the lens. So if you are taking freeze action shots, your shutter speed will need to be up for that and thus the IS is of limited value.

Subjects of slow action or still shots, give a great use for the IS and the slower shutter speeds. This also allows smaller aperatures for greater depth of field. An important consideration with telephoto shots.

[morenoar]

I am new in photography (only 1 year taking pictures) and what I found out this last weekend, the 100-400L on low light (cloudy day for me on saturday) it is slow and high shutter speeds (to freeze action and have good clear shots) could not be reached unless I went up to 800 or 1600ISO (film speed). I decided not to increase the film speed to avoid noise, and I lost 80% of my shots. To fuzzy or not sharp enough. When the sun finally showed up, my pictures where sharp and clear. The ISO experience is something I learned that I will need to try in the future. I just ASSUMED that the quality of pictures would be that of my Digital Rebel, when I had it, and did not want the same experience. Of course, if you have money, there are programs that will remove the noise. Many people have attested to that and have informed me of increasing the ISO (to increase shutter speed) and use these programs. I will when I have money to get the programs. Now, I have the 50mm 1.8 and that worked out good when I took single shots of close ups worked nice. I shot in RAW and can manipulate the pictures for brightness and other parameters. Ok, now I will stop ramping about my experience. Get a 2.8 lens or lower. I had the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and liked it very much. It only had an issue when in Sports mode, would not find the subject therefore it would not focus correctly. It worked great for all other modes. When I went to exchange it for another, Uncle Sam was nice to me at that time and I got the 100-400 instead. Even though I had to purchase all my equipment again, I choose the 100-400 for its reach and beautiful pictures it produce in the daytime. I am now looking for a 2.8 or faster lens to go along with my 50mm. I will more than likely get the sigma 70-200 2.8 for close range or for the small soccer fields. I have heard the Canons 200 2.8 and the 135 2.0 lens is good to. this maybe the range you need for indoor martial arts. I hope this helps you and I did not go on and on and on. This is from my experience of each lens

[Kirik]

Thanks for the info guys...

So far,I'm leaning toward this:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Would like the IS version, but can't afford it.