Possible sports set up: Ideas?

[VladDracule]

hello all im looking at putting togethor a decent sports set up.

What i currently have in mind is:
40D body (already own)
30D Body
70-200 f/4L (already own)
300 f/4L
400f/5.6L

The idea would be on shorter fields to use the 70-200 on the 30d and the 300 prime on the 40d then on long fields use the 400 on 40d and 70-200 on 30d once again.

Does this seem reliable? if i were to change anything out it would be the 70-200 f/4L for the 2.8

[tsaraleksi]

I would ....almost... suggest dropping the 300/4, the 400/5.6, and the 30D and instead spending more and getting a 300 2.8 (though I don't really know the numbers well enough to tell you if this is really a far fetched financial proposition). I use the 300/4 all the time, often with a 1.4x to give me a 420/5.6. I have found that it's really just to slow a set up for anything other than bright daylight, and I really wish that I had the f/4 so that I could use the 1.4x to get 420/4 or if I really wanted, a 2x to get 600/5.6.

Just a thought.

[gasrocks]

Each sport is going to have a different "best" lens. Outdoors, sunshine? Sigma 100-300/4 or the new 120-400, 150-500 OS lenses, perhaps.

[r1ch]

hello all im looking at putting togethor a decent sports set up.

What i currently have in mind is:
40D body (already own)
30D Body
70-200 f/4L (already own)
300 f/4L
400f/5.6L

The idea would be on shorter fields to use the 70-200 on the 30d and the 300 prime on the 40d then on long fields use the 400 on 40d and 70-200 on 30d once again.

Does this seem reliable? if i were to change anything out it would be the 70-200 f/4L for the 2.8

You did not state what type of sports, motor, indoor, outdoor. That would make a big difference as to which lens and camera.

[VladDracule]

right now it would be strictly outdoor sports, soccer primarely

[VladDracule]

I would ....almost... suggest dropping the 300/4, the 400/5.6, and the 30D and instead spending more and getting a 300 2.8 (though I don't really know the numbers well enough to tell you if this is really a far fetched financial proposition). I use the 300/4 all the time, often with a 1.4x to give me a 420/5.6. I have found that it's really just to slow a set up for anything other than bright daylight, and I really wish that I had the f/4 so that I could use the 1.4x to get 420/4 or if I really wanted, a 2x to get 600/5.6.

Just a thought.

looking at prices the 30d+300 f/4+400 f/5.6 comes out to 2214 + w/e price i can get on the 30d body

The 300 f/2.8L runs 3899...quite the price difference between the set ups. i could maybe wait an extra month and get the sigma 300 f/2.8 which runs 2599 and the 2nd body still.

I want the 2nd body with a shorter lens on it

[VladDracule]

anyone else have some feedback? i think im leaning more towards the holding off for a while to get the 300 f/2.8...quality over quantity eh? only thing holding me back is that im not a pro i dont get paid for my work...yet so im not sure i would spend that much on a single lens thats pretty limited in its uses (focal length is kinda short for nature photos and portraits? hah)

[sevans16]

70-200 f2.8 IS instead of the 70-200 f4 & 400 f5.6.

[bigjon0107]

looking at prices the 30d+300 f/4+400 f/5.6 comes out to 2214 + w/e price i can get on the 30d body

The 300 f/2.8L runs 3899...quite the price difference between the set ups. i could maybe wait an extra month and get the sigma 300 f/2.8 which runs 2599 and the 2nd body still.

I want the 2nd body with a shorter lens on it

Have you looked at getting a used non-is model? Thats what i use (with and without a 1.4) and prefer it hands down to the 300 f/4 and 400 f/5.6. You get an extra stop of light which is greatly needed in many sports applications. Plus you will be flat out impressed with the AF speed, it is truly amazing, and much faster then the lenses you mentioned.

[JCheungPhoto]

with the price of those other lenses and selling a 30D, you can buy the incredible 120-300 f/2.8 lens
or
keep the 30D and replace the 70-200 f/4 and 400 f/5.6/300 f/4 IS with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and 1.4xII tc + monopod

[bobbyz]

Best bang for the buck

40d with Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Only use one body.

Better 40d with canon 300mm f2.8 but then you need another body/lens.

[eigga]

300 2.8 IS = dream lens! Add the 70-200 2.8 on your hip and you are golden!

[VladDracule]

how much does a used 300 2.8 non is run? ive never really looked out for one

[packpe89]

For sports, I'd consider getting a 1d body. I just traded a 20D for a 1dmkii. My percentage of keepers has gone way up. My line-up includes the 1d and a 30D as well as a 70-200/2.8IS and 300F4/non-IS. When I shoot sports, which is alot (I have three sons ages 6-14) I usually use the 1dmkii and 300 on large fields and the 70-200 on small fields. I really like the 300 because of it's size and weight. I would love a 300/2.8, but would keep the 300F4 for shooting light. I use to have a Bigma (50-500) which was great, but heavy and too slow unless the sun was shining.

Also, the IQ from a 300F4 with a 1.4TC, is very similiar to the 70-200, so you might could do without the 400 (which I have never used, and not at all saying the 300 + TC combo would match, but the combo is good)

[VladDracule]

[quote=packpe89;5294813]For sports, I'd consider getting a 1d body. I just traded a 20D for a 1dmkii. [quote]

ive thought about doing this....selling my 40d and upgrading to a mk11 but i keep hearing that its better to invest in glass. I just recently purchase the 40D and im not so sure id want to part with it and lose money on it so soon :( ive had it for a grand total of 6 months. Because i do infortunetly work for one of the hated stores on this forum (best buy) i could return the item to the store (i gotta admit having the connections is nice) but the only thing that would accomplish would be store credit because it was bought on a best buy card so it doesnt help my liquid funds at all. i guess my move from there would be to also return the 70-200 f/4L and upgrade to the 2.8 IS without having to pay any difference and use the remainder on a manfrotto mem cards etc. But then i would have to pay the 2k+ for the MKII and im still stuck with only a 70-200 for my shooting instead of a prime which im thinking i would prefere

the only solution to that would be taking out a loan to buy the 300f/4 which i would like to avoid doing...

[20DNewbie]

how much does a used 300 2.8 non is run? ive never really looked out for one

At the moment KEH has one listed for $2,899.

I've seen the IS version running from $3,200-$3,600 lately on the boards, I grabbed mine last summer for $3,600. It truly is a fantastic lens if you can swing the loot for it. I saw one yesterday on FM for $3,300, it's gotta be gone by now though.

If you really decide on needing a second body maybe a used Sigma 120-300 2.8(again, KEH has one for $1,950 ATM[no I don't work for them, they're the only ones with one that I've found. lol]) and another 40D. This option could get you sorted for cheaper than a used 300 2.8 IS. I'd rather two of the same bodies so the C.Func/controls are the same, not that I'm trying to talk you out of the 300.

Tough choices ahead, good luck.

[VladDracule]

is the 120-300+70-200 a decent setup? seems to me like you wont be missing much losing out on 70-120

[20DNewbie]

Dunno, I was just throwing stuff out there so you'd be able to get a second body. I've got the 70-200 and the 300 attached whenever I shoot anything sports related, not that I shoot it that often lately.

[VladDracule]

right now i think im leaning a bit towards a used 30 d, upgrading my 70-200 to a 2.8 and a 300 f/4 rough figures that would run about...3grand? i could swing that in a few months of hard savings...

[dave kadolph]

how much does a used 300 2.8 non is run? ive never really looked out for one

A great lens but you need to be aware that Canon no longer services this old timer.

[Paul S]

[quote=packpe89;5294813]For sports, I'd consider getting a 1d body. I just traded a 20D for a 1dmkii. [quote]

ive thought about doing this....selling my 40d and upgrading to a mk11 but i keep hearing that its better to invest in glass. I just recently purchase the 40D and im not so sure id want to part with it and lose money on it so soon :( ive had it for a grand total of 6 months. Because i do infortunetly work for one of the hated stores on this forum (best buy) i could return the item to the store (i gotta admit having the connections is nice) but the only thing that would accomplish would be store credit because it was bought on a best buy card so it doesnt help my liquid funds at all. i guess my move from there would be to also return the 70-200 f/4L and upgrade to the 2.8 IS without having to pay any difference and use the remainder on a manfrotto mem cards etc. But then i would have to pay the 2k+ for the MKII and im still stuck with only a 70-200 for my shooting instead of a prime which im thinking i would prefere

the only solution to that would be taking out a loan to buy the 300f/4 which i would like to avoid doing...


I just don't see it. I was thinking of upgrading to a mark IIN from the 40D but I don't think I would be blown away by it's performance over the 40D. Sure it's better but not enough!!

the 40D is a great Camera and teamed up with a 300 2.8IS the photos well Blow you away !!! And if you need a little more reach use a 1.4 TC. The 300mm makes the 70-200 IS seem soft. SO having the two bodys that you have and then add 85mm 1.8 + 70-200 2.8 + 300 2.8 you will be all set.

[VladDracule]

well i did some numbers crunching and heres what i came up with

Option 1:
40D
70-200 f/2.8IS
30D
300 f/2.8 L IS
Total cost~4599
Time it would take~8 months

Option 2
40D
70-200 f/2.8L
1d MKII
300 f/4L IS
Total cost ~ 2950
Time it would take ~ 5 months

Option 3
40D
70-200 f/2.8L IS
1D MKII
Sigma 300 f/2.8
Cost ~ 4399
Time it would take ~ 7 1/2 months

the cost after each option is how much the equipment i dont already own would add up to be

time it would take is a rough idea on how long it would take me to save the money...and yes im quiet low paid :P

one last question...how are banks when it comes to loans for this type of equipment? are they pretty harsh when it comes to interest rates and approval for hobby equipment? would they even consider it?

[Paul S]

well i did some numbers crunching and heres what i came up with

Option 1:
40D
70-200 f/2.8IS
30D
300 f/2.8 L IS
Total cost~4599
Time it would take~8 months

Option 2
40D
70-200 f/2.8L
1d MKII
300 f/4L IS
Total cost ~ 2950
Time it would take ~ 5 months

Option 3
40D
70-200 f/2.8L IS
1D MKII
Sigma 300 f/2.8
Cost ~ 4399
Time it would take ~ 7 1/2 months

the cost after each option is how much the equipment i dont already own would add up to be

time it would take is a rough idea on how long it would take me to save the money...and yes im quiet low paid :P

one last question...how are banks when it comes to loans for this type of equipment? are they pretty harsh when it comes to interest rates and approval for hobby equipment? would they even consider it?


Option 1 - Don't take a loan - Amazon LLC Has 12 months no interest - Check them out :D

[VladDracule]

how do you apply for the no interest on amazon? ive never ordered from there

[JCheungPhoto]

option one no doubt...but you may want a battery pack to on the bodies, it helps even the weight and is more comfortable

[Paul S]

how do you apply for the no interest on amazon? ive never ordered from there


Go to there website and apply for there free credit card. When you use the card you will receive that offer of no interest for 12 months. Just make sure your buying through Amazon LLC. not one of there vender's.

[Paul S]

One last thing - you will need a monopod & Head for the 300.

You are going to love it !!!!!!!!

Don't forget the 1.4 & 2.0 TC for the future. the 300 takes both really well.

[JCheungPhoto]

the 2xII tc is great on primes like the 300L

[bobbyz]

how much does a used 300 2.8 non is run? ive never really looked out for one

I see one on FM for under $2500.

[bobbyz]

I would prefer 1 series for sports. I have 30d and it is dog compared to my 1dmk2. And this is with 500mm f4 IS. After using 1dmk2 for a month, this weekend I had to go back to 30d (had to send 1dmk2 ro canon for lens release problem) and 30d seemed like p&s, so slow. I know 40d is better than 30d but I would still take 1 series over it.

Regarding 70-200mm f2.8, if you don't use your lens where you need IS, getting the non IS version is better option. IS is not needed for sports.

If going with 2 bodies, I would have something like:

40d
1dmk2 ($1800)
70-200mm f2.8 non IS ($900)
300mm f4 non IS ($700)

Going with Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 is nice that one doesn't need to have 2 bodies.

[VladDracule]

well ive got 2 votes for option one and 1 vote for option 2...im kinda leaning towards option 2 but getting a used 300 f/4 and then saving and reselling to upgrade to the f/2.8....this would give me the better body and pave the way towards the better glass...does that seem like a reasonable compromise?