First off, I am still very new to DSLR's, but I am a fast learner and I'm loving it thus far! I currently have 2 lenses along with my T1i- a nifty fifty and a 70-200mm f/4L USM (non IS). I LOVE how sharp the 70-200 is, and I often find myself just staring at the lens for no reason. Never would have thought I'd be able to take such awesome pictures, BUT...
At a recent indoor soccer game, I found that an f/4 aperture just plain doesn't cut it while trying to hand hold the camera. I was able to get close enough to fill the frame, but the IQ was sub par. For the most part, I was shooting at 200mm, f/4, ISO 800 or 1600, and a shutter speed ranging from 1/100-1/200. These settings gave me the best results in that dimly lit indoor field. I wasn't trying to freeze the action as much as I was trying to catch the celebrations and mannerisms of my goofy little brother (they won 11-3), because a higher shutter speed made for very dark photos.
Any way, if I could get an even trade for a Canon 200mm f/2.8L USM Prime (mk1 or mk2), do you think that will better serve me? I have rarely used my 70-200 below its maximum 200mm focal length, and I believe the faster f/2.8 aperture will make a world of a difference. This will be my main walk around lens, so I want to make sure I have the right one.
I know 200mm is short for most sports, but hey, it's good enough for me right now. Plus, if I opt for the 200 f2.8 prime, I can easily add a TC if need be. Not sure if I would ever put a TC on my f/4 though since it's already a fairly slow aperture. How do these two lenses IQ stack up against each other? Is there any advantage the 70-200 has over the 200 prime, other than the additional range?
If there are any questions you'd like to ask, please feel free! I'd really appreciate help on this one guys. I don't have a ton of money to spend on camera stuff (wife is already about to kill me), so please don't recommend any other lenses. These two seem to be the best in my price range.