Soccer photography lenses!

anymore advice I need before going into buying the lens?

well, I would add- ask yourself what kind of images you want to make? If you are documenting a game for your kids and team then you can make due with most anything. I have even seen those with limited focal reach shooting from the sides and getting nice shots. If you want "standout" images then you really want the better glass. Sharp image, wide aperture, fast focus = standout (disregarding the most important- "technique" of course)

Stuart Leslie wrote in post #16163387
well, I would add- ask yourself what kind of images you want to make? If you are documenting a game for your kids and team then you can make due with most anything. I have even seen those with limited focal reach shooting from the sides and getting nice shots. If you want "standout" images then you really want the better glass. Sharp image, wide aperture, fast focus = standout (disregarding the most important- "technique" of course)

kebup wrote in post #16160345
Predominately day matches but wouldn't mind one that works for both. Will be on the sidelines. Will spend maximum 1k-1.2k. Senior level.

Check out the sports section and see the different lens used for soccer games https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=30

or do an image search on threads with "soccer" in the title

Like the other poster said, if you want better pics (blurred background, sharp, fast focus) then you need good glass

kebup wrote in post #16154709
Hey guys!
...
Options are:
-SIGMA 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM
- Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
- Sigma AF 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX DG OS HSM
- EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Telephoto Zoom Lens
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

If I were purchasing a lens primarily for soccer, I'd go with the Canon EF 100-400mm.

My kids are also involved in indoor swimming, so I purchased the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II -- for soccer I often use it with the 1.4x or 2.0x extenders. I'm always able to stand on the side of the field and I shoot with the 1.4 most often, but no matter which of the 3 configurations I go with, I always feel like my hands are tied. If you are able to stand on the side of the field, I really think the 100-400 is about the optimal range for the majority of the action.

The Sigma 50-500 is an excellent lens, but given the choice, I go with the Canon.

I found on a crop camera the 70-200 covered half of the field pretty good. Shot up to U19 with it, just for kicks I put a 400 5.6 on a second camera and found most of the action way too close and hardly used it. So for me on a larger field it seemed that anything over 300 was too much most of the time.

The used 300 f/4 non-IS I mentioned is a good buy for soccer. Only like $650ish perhaps.

20D+300 f/4 non-IS:

Here's my progression (or regression) of lenses:


Started with 70-200 f/2.8IS (found this to be short) moved to
100-400mm (great, but needed decent light) then
300mm f/4 IS (liked it but needed to get use to the fixed focal length) then
300mm f/2.8 IS to (hated it...way to big and bulky for what I was doing) then
Current Lens Go to Lens for Soccer: 100-400mm (back to this one again....will use this until a MKII is released)

wombatHorror wrote in post #16164618
another I noticed that despite being locked into a single focal length far and away by a huge majority my best shots came from the 300 2.8 IS.

If your using a 7D for sports like I do, the 200mm 2.8 is essentially equivalent. And is a great compact and high performance sports lens.

It occurs to me that one lens that should definitely be considered, that is absent from your list, is the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM.

As another poster noted, the 300-400 range is marginally useful for soccer.
This 70-300 is a newer design with quicker AF, only 2/3 the weight of the 100-400 (2.31lbs vs 3.04)
it has a zoom ring rather than the push/pull system (which is responsible for the 100-400's hallmark deficiency, it sucks air and dust which can end up on the elements and your sensor). The 70-300L also beats (although just barley) the 100-400 on sharpness at equivalent settings.
And it is $100 cheaper than the 100-400.

This has been the ideal focal range for soccer/football/baseba​ll dads for a long time. Canon has known this and has always had a lens in this range that was priced attractively for dads -- but, for the most part they were pretty deficient lenses. This one is not cheap, but Canon seems to have gotten it right for people that are more serious.