Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 24 Aug 2014 (Sunday) 10:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

"Affordable" Canon brand long lenses for full-sided soccer

 
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,149 posts
Gallery: 62 photos
Likes: 230
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Aug 25, 2014 08:55 |  #16

The 100-400L seems like it best fits all your requirements. Since you have a 6D, you can push your ISO to compensate for the slower aperture if light becomes challenging. While I do not use mine for field sports, I do use it for wildlife in motion, and the AF has been fine on a 5D3 and 7D.

I wouldn't worry too much about the rumors of the 100-400L MkII. As pointed out above, if such a lens does get announced it will be over your stated budget. Besides, a new version of that lens has to be the longest running rumor in Canonland -- I bought mine four years ago, and it was an old rumor even then.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ChuckingFluff
Goldmember
Avatar
1,391 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Canada Eh!
     
Aug 25, 2014 09:33 |  #17

I shot soccer last weekend on a canon 6D and the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS and there was only a couple of times in the 4 hours that I was there that I wish I had more reach. Not a bad combination off the field too.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,399 posts
Likes: 1505
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 25, 2014 11:16 |  #18

ChuckingFluff wrote in post #17116376 (external link)
I shot soccer last weekend on a canon 6D and the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS and there was only a couple of times in the 4 hours that I was there that I wish I had more reach. Not a bad combination off the field too.

Humm. First time I am hearing that 200mm is enough for soccer. All depends on what kind of field access you have. Typically I would use 400mm or longer for soccer. 70-200mm is nice for more closeup shots when long supertele is too long.

Lens wise 300mm f4 IS or non IS is nice but might be little short on FF.

For 2k budget, also check out non sport sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS model. I hear some folks can buy this for $2200 or so. Used may be less but much harder to find. I would not recommend sigma 120-300mm f2.8 non OS, even though you can buy on one used for $1500-$1700.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chinch
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
185 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: USA
     
Aug 25, 2014 11:39 as a reply to  @ ChuckingFluff's post |  #19

Thanks guys! The cheaper the 100-400 the better (so new one at 2x the cost is not ideal for me).

ChuckingFluff, what size field?

The ones here for Full-sided 11v11 soccer look more like these with sometimes no access near the field. The goals would be under the "goal post" (goalline at the back of the American football end zone)...
http://www.trackandtur​f.com …loads/2013/06/c​alvary.jpg (external link)
http://www.jobandjob.o​rg …ckHeights-DepkinField.jpg (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChuckingFluff
Goldmember
Avatar
1,391 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Canada Eh!
     
Aug 25, 2014 12:18 |  #20

Sorry I missed that you were on a full size field. I was shooting on a half field which most young kids play on. Full size field 200 would be too short for a lot of the shots. if you already have the 70-200 f4 have you tried a 1.4x TC to see if that works?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 25, 2014 16:57 |  #21

chinch wrote in post #17116657 (external link)
Thanks guys! The cheaper the 100-400 the better (so new one at 2x the cost is not ideal for me).

ChuckingFluff, what size field?

The ones here for Full-sided 11v11 soccer look more like these with sometimes no access near the field. The goals would be under the "goal post" (goalline at the back of the American football end zone)...
http://www.trackandtur​f.com …loads/2013/06/c​alvary.jpg (external link)
http://www.jobandjob.o​rg …ckHeights-DepkinField.jpg (external link)

the 100-400 will work for a full size field but for college lacrosse I usually wait until the players are close enough to shoot 300mm - 400mm for tighter shots


Canon 60D
100-400
400mm
f5.6


IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7260/13354396955_2a37e079d7_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mm5L​Xn  (external link) Christopher Newport University CNU St. Mary's College of Maryland Lacrosse women's NCAA Virginia Va. LAX (external link) by cnu_sports (external link), on Flickr



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hrblaine
Senior Member
284 posts
Joined Apr 2005
     
Aug 25, 2014 17:54 |  #22

I go along with the 70-300 IS USM. If I think I need more reach, I use a 1.4 extender. Works for me!

Harry




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chinch
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
185 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: USA
     
Aug 25, 2014 18:53 |  #23

Thank you, that is the type of shots I expect to get on occasion even if in the bleachers (when closer to the camera).

watt100 wrote in post #17117306 (external link)
the 100-400 will work for a full size field but for college lacrosse I usually wait until the players are close enough to shoot 300mm - 400mm for tighter shots

Canon 60D
100-400
400mm
f5.6


QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mm5L​Xn  (external link) Christopher Newport University CNU St. Mary's College of Maryland Lacrosse women's NCAA Virginia Va. LAX (external link) by cnu_sports (external link), on Flickr




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,979 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1604
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Aug 26, 2014 04:22 |  #24

I recently photographed my local clubs FA Cup Extra Preliminary round match, as the official photog. As such I had full sideline access, and as a wheelchair user set myself up at the edge of the oppositions box behind the goal line. I had a rented Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 28-300 to choose from on crop bodies. I pretty soon gave up on the Tammy as the zoom throw from end to end is about 270 degrees and the body diameter is so large you need to reposition your hand a couple of times. Really with the crop body 400 would have been ample. So I quickly switched to just the 28-300 and this worked well for shots from both ends of the field. The 300 was just long enough for the far end. The 28 was again just wide enough for the close action at the corners/goal.

I was shooting with a 50D, so with enough resolution for a reasonable crop where needed, as I tended to frame a little loose most of the time. This was the first time I have photographed football at a any serious level, and I'm definately not a fan of the game. If I were to be doing this regularly I would on an FF sensor I would probably pick the Sigma 50-500 OS as my go to lens. For crop probably the 28-300L IS. I like the push/pull.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
packerfan1968
Member
40 posts
Joined Feb 2012
Location: South Bend, IN
     
Aug 26, 2014 07:42 |  #25

I've photographed high school soccer for several years now (football, too) and I find that 250-300mm is about the minimum focal length on a crop to capture significant amounts of action.

I've used the Sigma 150-500 the last few years, I've had good luck with it even at night, we have pretty well lit fields around here for the most part. I know you indicated a Canon lens only, but at least focal length wise, most shots are for me 200-400mm or so.

Here are some daytime pics with that lens from this past weekend, most all are in the 200-400mm range:
https://plus.google.co​m …lbums/605092184​2249382161 (external link)
(#12 in blue is my son, he's one of the captains!).


Facebook Photography Page (external link) | My Website - John Burzynski Photography (external link) | My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 26, 2014 09:12 |  #26

chinch wrote in post #17117499 (external link)
Thank you, that is the type of shots I expect to get on occasion even if in the bleachers (when closer to the camera).

if you want nice bokeh background shots then you will have to get off the bleachers and be on the sidelines. Shooting at f5 or f5.6 only gets you so far, that's why sports shooters like the longer larger aperture primes, nice but expensive

60D
Canon 100-400
f5.6
260mm cropped
(not a full-sided field !)

IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7363/10497818093_4e71868ce1_b.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Aug 26, 2014 09:42 |  #27

That 'tongue out' shot is great ...

I once shot a college pitcher (I was team photographer), and he stuck his tongue out every time. So, when I printed out some action images for the players, he got upset with me, thought I did it on purpose to make him 'look funny' ... So, next time he was on the mound, I took six pitches in a row, and every one he stuck his tongue out. It was simply a reflex in his delivery and he didn't even realize it. Too funny!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sdipirro
Goldmember
Avatar
2,207 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Dec 2005
     
Aug 26, 2014 15:04 |  #28

I shoot soccer on a full-frame (1dx) and have been doing so for years. A 70-200 is a fine choice for 6v6 soccer (young kids) or 3v3 soccer (small field but small to big kids). An 8v8 soccer field is half the size of an 11v11 field, and I found that 300mm was usually enough. I shoot from the sidelines and move with the flow of the game. When I shoot 11v11 soccer, it's the 400mm all the way. It's only a problem when the action suddenly gets close to me, and then I either stop shooting or have a second body with something like the 70-200 on it. On corner kicks, I run to a spot where I can capture the action at 400mm. I always shoot at f2.8 because I like to blur the background so it doesn't distract from the action, but that preference comes at a high price, especially at 400mm. You won't have IQ issues with the 100-400. You'll just need good light and some adjustment to the less than stellar focus speed when the action is quick.


Cameras: 1DX, 1D4, 20D, 10D, S90, G2
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm, 16-35mm f2.8L II, 24-70mm f2.8L, 70-200mm f2.8L IS, 300mm f2.8L IS, 200mm f2L IS, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L, 1.4x TC, 2x TC, 500D macro, Zeiss 21mm
Lighting: 580EX, Elinchrom 600 RX's, D-Lite 4's, ABR800, 74" Eli Octa, 100cm/70cm DOs, Photoflex Medium Octa and reflectors, PW's, Lastolite Hilite, Newton Di400CR bracket

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phototeacher
Senior Member
262 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2007
     
Aug 29, 2014 15:52 |  #29

I find the same thing with HS pitchers; great facial expressions, but not always the most flattering shot for the newspaper!

monkey44 wrote in post #17118593 (external link)
That 'tongue out' shot is great ...

I once shot a college pitcher (I was team photographer), and he stuck his tongue out every time. So, when I printed out some action images for the players, he got upset with me, thought I did it on purpose to make him 'look funny' ... So, next time he was on the mound, I took six pitches in a row, and every one he stuck his tongue out. It was simply a reflex in his delivery and he didn't even realize it. Too funny!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Aug 30, 2014 09:30 |  #30

I have shot a lot of HS sports including soccer. The majority have been with a 1D or 7D body and these lenses:

70-200 f/4 IS / 1.4 TC
70-200 f/2.8 w/ 1.4 TC
70-200 f/2.8 IS II w/ 1.4 TC
300 f/4L
400 f/5.6L
100-400L

All are gone except the 100-400L. There is just too much time when 300mm is NOT long enough. In fact 400 is not long enough but the budget won't allow me to go longer.


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,889 views & 0 likes for this thread
"Affordable" Canon brand long lenses for full-sided soccer
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is OverTheHill
767 guests, 344 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.