70-200 f4 for mainly outdoor sports on a 7D?

[bigwill]

I'm about to pull the trigger on the 70-200 f4. The price right now is perfect. Only negative I hear is that its slow and poor in low light. Will this be a big issue for me? I mainly will use it at outdoor sports events. I shoot alot of youth baseball and soccer. I recently purchased a 85 1.8 for basketball which worked incredible. I'm thinking if I ever need low light lens I can switch to the 85 outdoors. I have close access to all events I shoot so the range wouldnt be a issue. I have a 7D and wondering how is it with the 70-200 f4. Any help is appreciated.

[m.c.chavez]

im sure youll be fine.

[Beni N.]

Outdoor with good light pretty much negates the poor light issue. As for the slow auto focus, this lens is one of the few lenses on Amazon with a 5.0 rating. I don't think it's too bad. (several review sites don't think it is either)

[bigwill]

Thanks I always shoot in bright conditions outside during the early day. I really was concerned with the slow focus but the reviews on Amazon and B&H are 5 star. It should be fine.

[KVN Photo]

For outdoor sport it will be fine, I use it too for school sport documentary, and it's perfectly fine.
You will get about 1/500 s at ISO 200

[bigwill]

How sharp are the sports action shots with this lens? In perfect conditions of course. Just wondering how sharp it is compared to the 2.8.

[MT Stringer]

Here is an example gallery. I used a 7D w/300 f2.8 some of which I had the 1.4x added for greater reach. For the close up shots, I used the 70-200 f/2.8 on the MK3.

If you are shooting high school soccer or in this case, field hockey, the fields are big. Youth fields are a lot smaller so the 70-200 will probably work until it gets late in the day. You'll be out of luck when the sun sets.

Hope this helps.
Mike

[bigwill]

Thanks Mike. Gonna check out the gallery.

[phreeky]

If you want to be real sure, go out with another lens set at F/4 and see what exposures you get. Also with a shorter lens you can crop them to 200mm equiv to see what sort of coverage 200mm will get you.

Honestly I think F/4 @ 200mm is fine exposure wise, but 200mm simply isn't enough for many sports unless you limit yourself to those at your end/side of the field.

[bigwill]

Great idea phreeky! Yes I'm definately limiting myself at 200 but I do move around alot and get some great shots. Once day I will go longer..

[Jason C]

You will have no issues with the 70-200/4 L in bright conditions, and the lens is already sharp wide open. If you need reach, this lens takes a 1.4 TC very well and it'll get you an extra 90mm on the long end. You'll lose a stop, but if it's bright you've got no worries.

Jason C

[bigwill]

Thanks Jason. I will definately look into the extender too. I can't wait until I get this now. I shot with a old 100-300 usm 4.5-5.6 last year and got some really good results. I was lacking the sharpness that I wanted but my clients thought they were great. So this definately should be a step up.

[muskyhunter]

I just went the route of 70-200 f4 is with 1.4x tc. Will test it out later today. I've owned the cheaper 70-300 is USM and 55-250 is so I'm hoping for better images.

[KVN Photo]

Originally Posted by bigwill

How sharp are the sports action shots with this lens? In perfect conditions of course. Just wondering how sharp it is compared to the 2.8.

According to my friend EF 70-200 f/2.8L USM, mine is sharper even at f/4.