70-200mm f4 L for Motorsport photography

[Historics_mad]

Hi all,

I was wondering if I could pick your brains please?

I recently upgraded to an EOS 350d, and am looking for a zoom lens for motorsport use. In particular the Canon ef 70-200 f4 L, and was wondering if any of you out there have any experiences of this lens on overcast days??.
I would LOVE a f2.8 L lens, but can only just stretch to the f4 at the moment.

Another option was the ef 75-300 f4-5.6 usm image stabilised lens, but even with the IS, is the "L" lens still a better bet???

Basically, I just want to make sure that I could get reasonable (I`m no pro as you may have guessed!) shots with the f4L lens, handheld,panning on dull days at probably approx 110-150mm in the main.

Hope all this makes sense, and I`d be grateful for any advice you can give me

Thanks

Colin.

[Persian-Rice]

Should be perfectly fine, depends how dark it gets. You can always change the ISO.

[Croasdail]

200 is going to be really short for motorsports - and given your lighting constraints - 5.6 at 300 could be an issue as well. If you want to stay all Canon - look at the 300 f4 L Prime. You can find some really nice used ones if need be. If you are a couragous type and willing to tred off into the world of 3rd party lenses - look at the sigma 100-300 f4. F2.8 would be nice - but if I were to prioritize - I would go for more reach at 300 - f4 will still give you reasonable DOF control. I think one of the most flelible motorsports lenses is the 120-300 sigma f2.8 - but it has a price to match. It is the direction I am heading.

[Cadwell]

The 70-200mm f/4L is a great lens for pan shots. I use it that way quite often. It is a little short for head on / angled shots at most circuits.

[Croasdail]

The 70-200mm f/4L is a great lens for pan shots. I use it that way quite often. It is a little short for head on / angled shots at most circuits.

Either you don't have as many fences as we do here - or you have figured a way to find yourself on the right side off them....

Locally, most good panning locations are adorned with plenty of polls and wire mesh - all of which play havoc on autofocus. I "get" to shoot long back into action areas from spots where the fencing isn't an issue.

[Historics_mad]

Hi Chaps,

Thanks for the info..it would seem that the 70-200 f4L would be fine (if perhaps a little short), perhaps bumping the ISO up?
I normally shoot at 200..would 400 be in the ballpark.. would that affect the motion of the wheels etc in the shot??
Sorry if these are basic questions....I have a basic understanding of all the settings, but putting them into practice is where I come unstuck!!

Thanks for the info about the 300mm lens and the sigma`s (although I`d prefer to stick with Canon) croasdail, I`ll look into them..

Persian-rice... When you say how dark it gets..presumably you mean early or late in the day, or if a dark rain cloud comes over??

Cadwell...great shots from Cadwell last weekend.I particularly like the 500cc F3 pics

Thanks again....

[Historics_mad]

Croasdail.... Brands Hatch and Goodwood, together with a few Hillclimbs are my usual haunts, and thankfully there are quite a few places at each of those where you can get a reasonable unobstructed shot!

I guess you are in the States....a bit more safety conscious there??

[Dave_G]

After a fair bit of research I think I'm going to go for a 70-200 f4 L but not just yet....maybe after Chr*stmas I think.

I've managed to borrow one for the weekend from a colleague who says it will be more than adequate for my requirements. He said I'd be able to use a TC with it and get much better results than my clunky old 75-300 f4.5-6.3 USM....

You watch. I'll use it this weekend and probably have one of my own by the end of next week.

Must resist.

[oloughlinc]

If you haven't been there yet, Fred Miranda has a great review section that encompasses most lenses available for the Canon. I know you stated that you wanted to stay with Canon, but the suggestion of the Sigma 100-300 is actually a good choice. Take a look at the reviews for both the 70-200 f4 L and the Sigma, and they are fairly close in performance.
Check here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/
Just my .02...

[BigRed450]

Personally I find the Canon 100-400L IS best for the motorsports I shoot. I find that 300mm generally comes up a little short for tight shots. A 70-200 f-4L with T/C is no match for the 100-400L.

[Matt_P]

Personally I find the Canon 100-400L IS best for the motorsports I shoot. I find that 300mm generally comes up a little short for tight shots. A 70-200 f-4L with T/C is no match for the 100-400L.

How much does that beast cost again vs. the 70-200? ;)

[JGPhotoZ]

Just want'd to share this tid bit tip......I shoot alot of sports...and actually....for the first time
..just this past weekend....I shot a motorcross function. I'll share those photos with ya...as soon as I burn the cd. Anyways....want'd to let ya know.....I shoot with the Tokina 80-200mm 2.8f.
lens. I shop'd high and low...and compaired like crazy. For the price....its by far...the best constent f stop lens. I love it. Great sharpness....excellent color. I got mine from B and H Photo.
I'll post some cycle shots....today....ok.

[BigRed450]

How much does that beast cost again vs. the 70-200? ;)

The Beast cost little more then the 70-200 4L and Canon TC combined, but worth every penny. Remember, it can allow you to get those tight shots from a safe distance...

[Matt_P]

As I was going through my USGP photos I can't help but notice how most are out of focus... a LOT of shots were performed with a Sigma 1.4x teleconverter and the lens extended out fully to 200mm (280 including the tele). I'm not sure if the tele had anything to do with it. It's just slightly out, though... from what I can tell, backfocused. The few shots that were closer which I performed without the tele (and also not zoomed to 200mm) seemed much better.

I'm beginning to wonder if the Canon version would indeed be better. It costs about twice as much, so it should be!

I do try to find spots that are as close as I can be to the action so I won't have to zoom so far. But Indianapolis doesn't have many of those spots that I could see... unless you fancy shooting through a fence, which I personally do not!