I'm relatively new to the photo world. I currently have a 60D with just the 18-55 IS II kit lens and have been learning a lot. I try to shoot all manual all the time, it forces me to learn what's going into a good picture, though my good ones are few and far between
Anyway, in a couple weeks I was going to shoot some pics for my old high school. They're going for their 4th in a row wrestling state title and I know my set up won't cut it in those conditions. If they moved it outside in the middle of the day maybe, but not in an old fieldhouse.
I am not going to purchase any more equipment till i'm better with what I have, but was thinking of renting.
I was thinking of an 85 1.8, but i doubt I'll be matside. Most likely i'll be up in the stands.
I was going to go with the 70-200 f2.8 for the variability of zoom for the mat shots and some candids of the crowd as well. I was thinking i wouldn't need the IS version since I will be shooting action and have a faster shutter speed, or am I incorrect in that thinking? It's about half the price of the rental.
I also looked at a couple primes, the 200 2.8L and the 135f2L and have been leaning more towards just getting the prime as I don't care about the crowd and won't be changing spots enough to catch all the mat action and get to a spot I can turn and get the crowd too.
Anyway, I type too much, what are the chances I can get some good shots of low light action with the 200 2.8 or the 135f2? and I'm assuming IS makes no difference because I'll be using a faster shutter to catch action? will the difference of 2.8 to 2 make a noticeable difference in my shots? or is it too hard to say not knowing what the actual lighting will be like? and truth be told, I don't even remember really how good or bad it is, though I've been there many times. I'm pretty sure I can count on it being less than optimal.
Any of you with more experience know if these work well with a 60D in low light? focus issues? I read a lot on here, but have no real experience to fall back on. Thanks in advance.