Sports Lens

[SixEagle]

Just recently got into digital photography, and was looking for a few recommendations on a lens. I have a Canon 40d. I currently only have two lenses, a 24-70 f2.8 and a 50mm prime f1.8. I recently took it to a professional baseball game, and obviously I couldn't get the reach I'd like.

I'd like to pick up a lens for sports photography, both professional and little league, primarily baseball and football. I'm looking for something in the 600-700 dollar range, and had it narrowed down to 3 choices:
Canon 200mm f/2.8L
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8
Canon 70-200mm f/4 L

I'm guessing the ones that have variable aperture ranges in the 3.5-5.6 range aren't going to get me the kind of shutter speeds I want (except on perfect skies at 4 pm), and would end up being generally useless for what I want it for.

None of these lenses have IS. Is that a strong priority considering I'd probably be using extremely fast shutter speeds? Ideally I'd save up for the 70-200mm f/2.8 with IS, but being a grand more, that's not a realistic option right now.

I'm not too concerned with the 200mm prime not having zoom. My primary concern is shutter speed and reach.

Would the f/4L get me the shutter speeds I want? Or would I be better off going with the 200mm prime with the 2.8 aperture?

Any experience with the Tamron? The combination of reach, speed and zoom (which even though it's not my primary need for this lens, wouldn't be a bad thing to have) is appealing.

I think I'm leaning towards the 200mm prime, and getting the 1.4x converter, which could extend the reach to 280mm with an f/4. Does anyone have any experience with the converter with the 200mm prime? Would I still be able to get adequate shutter speeds for sports photography in decent lighting conditions?

[Double Negative]

Baseball? If you're in the regular stands and you can get the lens in (which is critical, most stadiums don't allow lenses over 6" long or DSLRs) then the 100-400mm would make a great lens. Not the best for night games, but daylight would work very well.

[SixEagle]

The stadium doesn't have a restriction on lense size, but monopods and tripods are prohibited, unfortunately.

[ChrisRabior]

If 70-200 is long enough for you, then the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 would probably be a good choice. Would double as an excellent lens for hockey, basketball, soccer, football, etc.

Otherwise, you're in the same boat I'm in. I want a zoom over 400mm that's not going to break the bank, and the sad truth is that there really isn't anything cheap and still quality in that range. Sigma has a few pretty good options, and that's probably what I'll end up getting.. perhaps even one of their zooms that hits 500mm on the upper end.

[tsaraleksi]

Unless you have really stellar field level seats, you won't be getting much worth writing home about from the professional games, no matter what the lens. Stands shots are nice for memories, but I don't know that I've ever seen some that are good 'sports' shots. Now for little league, the 200 f/2.8 is probably your best bet-- reach and low light ability.

[SixEagle]

@Chris: Yeah, I'd love something in the 400mm range, but my budget's just not there.

tsaraleksi: I do have fairly decent season tickets (15 rows off the field in right field). There's also some decent standing room only available areas that you can get if you get there early enough. Here's some shots I took at a 70mm focal length. The first two are from standing room only, the last 3 are from my seats:
http://www4.bithosts.com/baseball/

[oaktree]

I have the 200/2.8 and have used it with a Kenko 1.4 TC. They work fine, but I think you may need for reach for baseball.