Advice on upgrade to shoot soccer

I split the difference and picked up a like new 70-300L.

IMAGE LINK: http://s6.photobucket.​com …6-27_zpsssk6yve1.jpg.htm​l

Ill offer another variant.
Sell current 70-200 Fe for 500-$600
Buy the 7dii for $1300
Buy the 70-200 f2.8 mark II, $1800 sale/refurbished/used
Buy the Canon 1.4x III $360 via canonpricewatch.com
The quality out of this kit will crush any of the other suggests in image quality, especially indoor.

being your child is the keeper is a huge luxury and wont need 400mm.

PM me if you want to see this combo from this past Spring.
Or you can find my post on FM sports corner name=gschlact

For soccer you need reach. Camera wise 7d ver I or even 10+ yr old 1dmk2 will work real good unless you shooting lot of night games. You need to spend money on the lens. I would go for Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS model. Sports version is more but non sports can be had for $2000. This puts you within $3000 budget and better than using 1.4x TC on 70-200mm f2.8 as recommended. f2.8 at 300mm really really helps IMHO.

bobbyz wrote in post #17634535
For soccer you need reach. Camera wise 7d ver I or even 10+ yr old 1dmk2 will work real good unless you shooting lot of night games. You need to spend money on the lens. I would go for Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS model. Sports version is more but non sports can be had for $2000. This puts you within $3000 budget and better than using 1.4x TC on 70-200mm f2.8 as recommended. f2.8 at 300mm really really helps IMHO.

Bobbyz,
don't get me wrong, the Sigmas and f2.8 have great reputation. But, with that older model, I believe there was some AF speed challenges, definitely not something soccer would forgive. can you tell us more about that lens vs the current version(s)? I thought even the used price was about $3k.

Guy

gschlact wrote in post #17634636
Bobbyz,
don't get me wrong, the Sigmas and f2.8 have great reputation. But, with that older model, I believe there was some AF speed challenges, definitely not something soccer would forgive. can you tell us more about that lens vs the current version(s)? I thought even the used price was about $3k.

Guy

From my understanding OS and sports model very small change. Basically sports model lets you do focus adjust using the sigma dock while OS model doesn't. OS model used goes for around $2000 but hard to find.

Problem versions are the older non OS models of the 120-300mm. I used to have one and would not buy that. They go for $1500 or so now.

bobbyz wrote in post #17634668
From my understanding OS and sports model very small change. Basically sports model lets you do focus adjust using the sigma dock while OS model doesn't. OS model used goes for around $2000 but hard to find.

Problem versions are the older non OS models of the 120-300mm. I used to have one and would not buy that. They go for $1500 or so now.

BobbyZ,
So, have you used the non sports newer one for fast sports shooting, I'd love to check some out from tracking/servo perspective? Can you share link to posts? Also, when shopping, how does one differentiate between the older OS version and OS version you are recommending? It would be helpful info.
TIA,
Guy

I didn't buy any lens as I am slowly moving to Fuji. I was looking at the OS model. It clearly states on the lens OS. Sports Model has a different logo like Sigma Art models of 35mm, 500mm have.

gschlact wrote in post #17634636
Bobbyz,
don't get me wrong, the Sigmas and f2.8 have great reputation. But, with that older model, I believe there was some AF speed challenges, definitely not something soccer would forgive. can you tell us more about that lens vs the current version(s)? I thought even the used price was about $3k.

Guy

I have the 120-300 f/2.8 OS, not the Sport Model, and there is nothing wrong with the AF on this lens. This is the main reason I recommended it to the OP in the beginning of the thread. It's not as fast as a prime but no zoom is. I bought this lens for soccer, my son is a HS player. I later bought a 400mm as I wanted more reach but I kept the Sigma as it is great for baseball, softball, and some basketball cross court shots.

bobbyz wrote in post #17634686
I didn't buy any lens as I am slowly moving to Fuji. I was looking at the OS model. It clearly states on the lens OS. Sports Model has a different logo like Sigma Art models of 35mm, 500mm have.

No problem. I am not confident the non sports model works well for tacking sports. While I have heard it is near identical image quality, I am not so sure about the AF speed/accuracy (independent of the dock adjustability).

tmalone893 wrote in post #17634709
I have the 120-300 f/2.8 OS, not the Sport Model, and there is nothing wrong with the AF on this lens. This is the main reason I recommended it to the OP in the beginning of the thread. It's not as fast as a prime but no zoom is. I bought this lens for soccer, my son is a HS player. I later bought a 400mm as I wanted more reach but I kept the Sigma as it is great for baseball, softball, and some basketball cross court shots.

Tmalone,
For your model, how do you distinguish it from prior OS version, and is your model the one that sells for $2k vs $3k?

gschlact wrote in post #17634711
No problem. I am not confident the non sports model world well for sports. While I have head it is near identical image quality, I a, not so sure about the AF speed/accuracy (independent of the dock adjustability).

Here is one for you in the rain.

Photo taken with Canon EOS 5D Mark III, f/3.2 @ 300 mm, 1/1000, ISO 12800, No Flash

gschlact wrote in post #17634712
Tmalone,
For your model, how do you distinguish it from prior OS version, and is your model the one that sells for $2k vs $3k?

Mine is the first version OS, $2K, and it looks different from the Sports model. This is what my Sigma looks like.

gonzogolf wrote in post #17598394
Teleconverters are for occasional use (unless you are strapping them on a big white prime lens. If you want 400, get a 400.

Great advice, I have a 1.4X Canon and IQ tends to be less once this goes on. Was shooting the 70-200 2.8 IS but as the kids got older and the field size increased it had its limitations. Went to get the "cheap" upgrade in the 1.4x and not too much onger bit the bullet and bought the 100-400 IS II and can reach now.

rebelsimon wrote in post #17598921
Field sports need something fast and long. I think you got some good advice when someone suggested a 70d + 120-300mm, probably the best bang for your buck for sports.

I shoot a 70D and a 100-400 now and it has done the job once my girls moved to the 11v11 fields...