lens recommendation

i have a 60d body and a single lens for it, a sigma 35/1.4
now that the kids are playing more field sports, i'd like to get a more appropriate lens for catching the action. i'm thinking a zoom lens will allow me some flexibility due to the different field sizes and layouts but really can't shell out for a top end piece. any recommendations? is the kit lens any good? i'm sure they're all over craigslist.

also, can someone clarify what type of lense i need?
ef mount? is? usm? all lost on me.

ekkthree wrote in post #18320707
i have a 60d body and a single lens for it, a sigma 35/1.4
now that the kids are playing more field sports, i'd like to get a more appropriate lens for catching the action. i'm thinking a zoom lens will allow me some flexibility due to the different field sizes and layouts but really can't shell out for a top end piece. any recommendations? is the kit lens any good? i'm sure they're all over craigslist.

The least expensive option would be the 55-250 STM. When I had my 60D, I ended up buying a 70-300L. It's an amazing lens, though it's heavier than the 55-250 STM. You can get the 55-250 STM from Canon Direct as a refurbished lens at quite a savings. You get a full one year warranty with refurbished lenses now, so that isn't a concern. I'm at work so I can't post the link but you can google Canon refurbished lenses and it will come right up.

At the moment, you can pick up a gently used 70-300L for around $700. I paid $1500 for mine but the retail price is less now. The reason they are so inexpensive used at the moment is because Canon released the 100-400L ii and many people migrated to that lens.

The 55-250 STM is an EF-s lens so it won't work on a full frame body. They are made to fit the crop cameras like your 60D.

The 70-300L is an EF lens so it will work on your body as well as any other DSLR body Canon makes.

Think about a 70-200mm f/4 for day time pics and good for portraits of the kids too.

I agree the EF-S 55-250mm STM is a good choice.

Your 60D is a "crop frame" camera, which accepts all EF-S and EF lenses, but EF-S lenses were designed for this type of camera.

EF-S lenses: designed for crop frame cameras like the 60D (and the 7D and Rebels and many others). The more recent versions (last 2 or 3 years) are very sharp. They are lighter and cheaper than the corresponding EF lenses. So I would suggest getting an EF-S lens unless there isn't an EF-S lens available for what you want to do.

EF lenses: made for "full frame" cameras, bigger than crop frame. EF lenses are big and expensive. But there is a greater selection of EF lenses than EF-S lenses. So if you have a particular need, say for an extra wide aperture or super long focal length or tilt-shift or whatever, these are available in EF but you probably won't find it in EF-S.

You said you don't want a "top end piece", so get the EF-S 55-250. Another possibility would be a used 70-300mm (non-L). It is an EF lens but gives longer reach than the 55-250.

What kit lens so you have? The 18-55mm STM is excellent.

If you have the budget...The 70 to 300 L.. You will get a bit more reach.
Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS Looks intersting but it is far from a low light performer.

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM is a great budget lens for outdoor, daytime, sports photography. Canon 70-300L is an awesome lens for outdoor daytime sports, my favorite. I have seen many very good used ones from $1,000 down to $700. I paid $900 for a like new one. Outdoor sports under lights will almost certainly require a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. They are not cheap, they are not even close to being a budget lens.

IF THERE IS A CHANCE YOUR KIDS WILL BE PLAYING UNDER LIGHTS WHEN THEY GET OLDER, get the bargain 55-250 now and start saving for a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. A few, very few, youth athletic fields have good enough lighting to be shooting with f/4 or slower and still maintain a fast enough shutter speed to stop action.

Sports photography is not cheap even at the lowest amateur level. My bank account knows all too well. It can be very exciting, rewarding and worth every penny when the subjects are your family.

I know you said a zoom but for low budget and quality, look a the 200 f/2.8 prime. Most field sports 200mm is too short but I think the prime will be just fine in this case. You can find them used for $400-$500 . My first choice would be the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS. You can fine them 1300-1600 used. I would go that direction before the 70-200. It's an awesome lens but the Sigma will get you closer.

ekkthree wrote in post #18320707
...... but really can't shell out for a top end piece.

You really ought to specify a budget before one can recommend a lens.
What kind of field sports?

+1 on Craig's suggestion, 55-250 now and start saving for a low light lens.

Regarding IS, you may find the kids get quick enough that you will use shutter speeds that let you do without it, but IS will still give you a more stable view.

Regarding STM and USM, I find both focus more quickly than the slower micro motor lens I had, which helps when the kids get fast.

You may find back button focus helps your technique, it helps mine, but not everyone likes it.

i'll start looking on cl for a 55-250 or the 70-300
wasn't sure what to expect budget-wise, but i'd be lying if i said i'm prepared to spend more on the lens as i did on the body. but i'm fine with buy used and selling off down the road to mitigate the cost.

the sports change with the seasons, but for now they're into soccer, football, and baseball. something like baseball has a dedicated layout with bleachers and such but really i need to be in the outfield shooting to avoid chain link fences. soccer's the worst because they usually play at giant open fields and have like 8 games going at once. totally flat so there's almost always a head or body in the way.
i dunno how you guys get your shots...

ekkthree wrote in post #18328147
i dunno how you guys get your shots...

With lots and lots of practice, and often, lots of money.

Sibil wrote in post #18328174
With lots and lots of practice, and often, lots of money.

A lot of truth to both parts of this.