PDA

View Full Version : 70-200F2.8IS vs. 70-300 DO IS (for sports)


MDJAK
4th of May 2005 (Wed), 19:38
Now that the weather is nice and wrestling season is over for the local high schools, I've been shooting their baseball games. I love shooting baseball. I find it one of the easier sports to shoot: Outdoors, usually great light on sunny days enables high shutter speeds with low ISO. The first few games I used my 70-200F2.8 IS on my 1DSMKII with excellent results. For one game I added my Canon 1.4 teleconverter to extend my reach a bit, even though I'm able to stand within about ten feet of the base paths, near first or third base.

Today, I decided to lighten my load a bit and used my 70-300 DO IS. It had been lonely in my camera backpack lately, not seeing very much use at all.
While I was pleased with the results and the slight bit more reach, the relative slow speed of it required ISO up to 800, wherein with the 70-200F2.8 I was using 200, 320 and 400.

I also decided to be lazy in another way today and shoot only jpegs, large, at a setting of 2 with saturation set. I will actually be getting paid for the first time this Saturday, helping out another photographer at a sportsplex in Connecticut. He's going to have a runner picking up and returning my cards. He has the Digital Rebel and does not want to handle my very large raw files, nor my large jpegs. He's asked me to give him files the same size as what his Rebel does, so that's why I used jpeg today.

All in all, the 70-300 is a great lens, and my main purpose in purchasing it was as a walkaround lens of high quality and good zoom range. For that it fits the bill just fine. Next time, however, I'll stick to my big whitey.

steibeldj
4th of May 2005 (Wed), 21:08
I did not need the high ISO on my DO today for my son's baseball game. I shot ISO 400 and should have set it to 200. I would love to borrow a friend's 70-200IS sometime.

On the other dark side of this lens, the sun was behind the team for my pictures so the lens flare of the DO showed its ugly head.:evil: No one really noticed me though so I didn't look like a Sports Illustrated photographer at the 7 year old league game.:D

I am disappointed in most of my shots, but that has to do with coposition, sun too low on the horizon and me not wanting to get in front of the other parents just trying to watch the game!

MDJAK
5th of May 2005 (Thu), 07:17
Surprisingly, the 70-200f2.8IS is easier to hand hold steady than the 70-300IS, even with the tripod plate on the 70-200 lens. I think the heft and fixed length of the lens helps.

As to flaring of the 70-300, I try to make sure I'm not facing the sun as you can see the washout right in the viewfinder.

With relation to gettin in front of other parents, I have a hard time doing that also. Even when I'm taking a team picture, I'm shy to tell everyone to look at the camera and so wind up with one or two faces that are staring off into space. But since I give the pictures away for free, I don't worry about it.

CyberDyneSystems
5th of May 2005 (Thu), 09:32
Oh yes,. I like the 70-300mm just fine.. but "In use" the 70-200mm will postitively demolish it in every way. Faster AF, better tracking,. obviously that larger aperture,. and purer more defined image qaulity..