Yes, I understand 300mm is not a super telephoto but a 400 is)
Trying to figure out what lens to save up for an purchase. I currently have a 1Dx and shoot motorsports, hockey, and cheer. I have been using a 70-200 2.8 VII for the indoor stuff and a Sigma 150-600C for the motorsports stuff but I am finding the 200mm to be pretty short on the reach. For what I've shot so far in motorsports it seems the vast majority of my photos were in the 500mm range, which would coincide with what I saw on the prime lenses from the credentialed shooters. However, I think 500mm would be too much reach for indoor use plus I need the 2.8 for cheer.
So it would seem as though my options are either a 300 2.8 or a 400 2.8, but not sure which is best for Hockey, and is one too much reach if I happened to pair it with a 7DII?
So I would consider picking up a;
300 2.8 IS V1
300 2.8 Non IS
400 2.8 IS V1
400 2.8 Non IS V2 (I know nothing about the history of the 400 line though and what years they made the non IS versions.)
Given my limited budget the 300 would make more sense as the 400 IS V1 seems to run about $1500 more than a similar 300.
Now for the tougher part, for something like HS or college sports where you can get closer to the field, would you choose the 300 or 400? (Assuming night time as I have the Sigma for sunny days)
Help me be less confused please.