70-200 f4L For Motorsport?

Exactly how good is the 70-200 f4L lens For Motorsport? How do people find the reach, as it is only 2300mm. I have the kit 75-300, which I know is crap, but 200mm seems quite short. I have a 450d body (which does take this lens right)

Set your 75-300mm lens for 200mm and take a look. It really depends on what kind of motorsports you want to photograph, where you can be, and what kind of images you want.

And yes, it is an EF lens, so the 70-200 f/4L will work on any EOS camera.

It's an excellent lens, sharp and fast focusing. Since most motorsports take place during the day the f4 is just fine. The only thing you'll need to consider is whether or not it's long enough for you.

Here are some motorsports images that seem to be useful, from a Canon lens.

Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Taken with a 70-200 f4 IS on a 7D,exif should be intact

DC Fan wrote in post #14927606
What sort of lens generated these images? The EXIF says it was a 75.0-300.0mm. But, that's a Canon 75-300mm lens? But how could that be? Everybody knows the lens is "crap? What could have happened? How could that lens have ever created these pictures?

No disrespect, but there is nothing special about those images. They're flat, dull, low contrast, and do not pop at all. I certainly wouldn't buy that lens based on these images.

Oh, and clean your sensor.

i'd like to have IS for any sort of panning shots...this way you could use a much slower shutter speed

adamo99 wrote in post #14929258
No disrespect, but there is nothing special about those images. They're flat, dull, low contrast, and do not pop at all. I certainly wouldn't buy that lens based on these images.

Oh, and clean your sensor.

+1 Those photos are the reason I want to upgrade!

adamo99 wrote in post #14929258
No disrespect, but there is nothing special about those images. They're flat, dull, low contrast, and do not pop at all. I certainly wouldn't buy that lens based on these images.

Oh, and clean your sensor.

I dont think anyone buys the 75-300 3.5-5.6 because they want to, its usually all they can afford as its super cheap.

as far as 70-200 for motorsports, its an excellent lens. Because it is clearer than your 75-300 you will be able to do a bit more cropping and get a very usable image. Even with a 1.4 extender you will be bumped tp f5.6 but you still can get an excellent image. I am currently using a 70-200 2.8 non IS and love it! You cant go wrong.

Now the 75-300 can take a decent photograph. But not very stunning.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

peeaanuut wrote in post #14929731
as far as 70-200 for motorsports, its an excellent lens. Because it is clearer than your 75-300 you will be able to do a bit more cropping and get a very usable image. Even with a 1.4 extender you will be bumped tp f5.6 but you still can get an excellent image. I am currently using a 70-200 2.8 non IS and love it! You cant go wrong.

Now the 75-300 can take a decent photograph. But not very stunning.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

as contrast to the 70-200 which even at F4 can be stunning. This was from behind the fence in the general admission area.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Thanks for the comparison, you can really see the difference, nice shots btw! Would you reccomend buying a 1.4x converter, or is there no need. As you say, I can just crop.

I have found the 1.4x to be helpful in some areas. Drops me to F4 on the 2.8 and I end up with only center focus point. It can be worth it. I think the 2x does some damage to the photos being 2 full stops down. It just makes them not pop and less sharp. The thought behind it is, its better to get a less than desirable shot than nothing at all.

Here is a shot taking with the 1.4x so it gives a 280mm focal length plus whatever the crop makes it if you wanna figure that in.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

It's not a "do all" Motorsport lens but a 70-200 is definitely worth having. Where you use it is up to you....

These are from the f2.8 Mark 2, but you get the idea...

Also quick question, I have found a 70-200 second hand for sale, approx 400 pounds (is that good value), but the seller said it was a 70-200 1:4, what does the 1:4 mean?

1:4 = f4 min aperture. 1:2.8 = f2.8 and so on.