Soccer lens

I have shot a many of soccer games for my kids and their teams. Typically, I use a 70-200 f4 with a 1.4, not always though.
I want to rent a longer lens for a tournament upcoming. I cannot afford the 300 2.8 right now.
What would you all suggest for a better bokeh? Light will be variable, but typically enough for f4 to f5.6 etc. I am thinking the 400 f5.6 or the 300 f4 IS. I am using a 7d and will bring the 5dII for close range.
What do you all think?

70-300L since you said f5.6 is OK.

I'd rather have the versatility of a zoom than the primes you listed for soccer.

I use the 100-400L for field sports and it is an excellent performer.

1downfall wrote in post #16351266
I have shot a many of soccer games for my kids and their teams. Typically, I use a 70-200 f4 with a 1.4, not always though.
I want to rent a longer lens for a tournament upcoming. I cannot afford the 300 2.8 right now.
What would you all suggest for a better bokeh? Light will be variable, but typically enough for f4 to f5.6 etc. I am thinking the 400 f5.6 or the 300 f4 IS. I am using a 7d and will bring the 5dII for close range.
What do you all think?

If your goal is to own a reasonably-priced lens for capturing daylight football of various kinds, that can be achieved with a Tamron 70-300 mm vibration control lens, as demonstrated by these images.

I second the 100-400

Thank you for your images DC. This is what am looking for in terms of bokeh. I may rent the 100-400 and see how it goes. I have always wanted this lens, but was very unsure of the push pull method. That Tammy is priced nicely!

1downfall wrote in post #16352071
Thank you for your images DC. This is what am looking for in terms of bokeh. I may rent the 100-400 and see how it goes. I have always wanted this lens, but was very unsure of the push pull method. That Tammy is priced nicely!

Push pull is wonderful for fast paced action shooting because it is instinctual. You push out when you want more 'reach' and you pull back as the action comes to you. I find it is completely natural.

I could see (maybe) not liking it as much for deliberate, slow work like landscapes from a tripod or something similar. But even then, I don't see what people are complaining about much.

JeffreyG wrote in post #16352106
Push pull is wonderful for fast paced action shooting because it is instinctual. You push out when you want more 'reach' and you pull back as the action comes to you. I find it is completely natural.

I could see (maybe) not liking it as much for deliberate, slow work like landscapes from a tripod or something similar. But even then, I don't see what people are complaining about much.

I also like the push/pull zoom of the 100-400L. I do not use mine for sports, but find the mechanism works well for wildlife, too.

Your 70-200/4 should cover 80% of the soccer shots. All the suggestions above will give you longer reach but not "better" bokeh. For better bokeh you are limited to using a f2.8 lens. When shooting with a longer lens, to capture distant shots, your boken will not necessarily be better because of longer lens-to-subject distance versus subject-to-background distance.
I would suggest renting a 70-200 f2.8 lens.

1downfall wrote in post #16352071
Thank you for your images DC. This is what am looking for in terms of bokeh. I may rent the 100-400 and see how it goes. I have always wanted this lens, but was very unsure of the push pull method. That Tammy is priced nicely!

the 100-400 is good for soccer (and other things)

sand soccer in Virginia Beach
60D
Canon 100-400
f6.3
100mm

Sibil wrote in post #16352116
Your 70-200/4 should cover 80% of the soccer shots. All the suggestions above will give you longer reach but not "better" bokeh. For better bokeh you are limited to using a f2.8 lens. When shooting with a longer lens, to capture distant shots, your boken will not necessarily be better because of longer lens-to-subject distance versus subject-to-background distance.
I would suggest renting a 70-200 f2.8 lens.

To me, 200mm is very limited for soccer owing to reach. Adding the 1.4X TC is better, but then the 100-400 will offer better AF performance.

Then there is the degree of blur and separation possible with each lens.

200mm @ f/4 = 50mm iris.
280mm @ f/5.6 = 50mm iris (obvious, since the TC does not change the iris)
400mm @ f/5.6 = 71mm iris.
200mm @ f/2.8 = 71mm iris.

So if you are shooting with all of these lens options at the maximum focal length possible, the 400mm f/5.6 lens will offer the same blur effect as the 200mm f/2.8 lens.

It's also true that when the action is close and you are shooting at less than the maximum focal length, then an f/2.8 lens will offer more blur than a 400mm lens. But I find on a soccer field that I shoot the 100-400L between 300mm and 400mm most of the time.

1downfall wrote in post #16351266
I have shot a many of soccer games for my kids and their teams.

What's Soccer ? ? ?............... ohhhhh you mean football, the game you play with your "Foot"

JeffreyG wrote in post #16352137
To me, 200mm is very limited for soccer owing to reach. Adding the 1.4X TC is better, but then the 100-400 will offer better AF performance.

Then there is the degree of blur and separation possible with each lens.

200mm @ f/4 = 50mm iris.
280mm @ f/5.6 = 50mm iris (obvious, since the TC does not change the iris)
400mm @ f/5.6 = 71mm iris.
200mm @ f/2.8 = 71mm iris.

So if you are shooting with all of these lens options at the maximum focal length possible, the 400mm f/5.6 lens will offer the same blur effect as the 200mm f/2.8 lens.

It's also true that when the action is close and you are shooting at less than the maximum focal length, then an f/2.8 lens will offer more blur than a 400mm lens. But I find on a soccer field that I shoot the 100-400L between 300mm and 400mm most of the time.

Thank you for the info and the education. Since the OP is shooting kids soccer, I find a longer lens less usefull since kids often tend to be crowding the ball and with a longer lens, it is more difficult to get player separation. At closer ranges, there is a better chance of capturing the player and the ball without all the other bodies crowding the shot. Of course this changes with older kids. Again, thanks for the info. For soccer, I try to shoot from angles that have the least distracting background. It helps a lot with shooting without an f2.8 lens.

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16352171
What's Soccer ? ? ?............... ohhhhh you mean football, the game you play with your "Foot"

LOL!
Them's fighting words futball vs football vs soccer vs "American" Football


have you considered the sigma 120-300 f2.8 with or without EF

Sibil wrote in post #16352192
Thank you for the info and the education. Since the OP is shooting kids soccer, I find a longer lens less usefull since kids often tend to be crowding the ball and with a longer lens, it is more difficult to get player separation. At closer ranges, there is a better chance of capturing the player and the ball without all the other bodies crowding the shot. Of course this changes with older kids. Again, thanks for the info. For soccer, I try to shoot from angles that have the least distracting background. It helps a lot with shooting without an f2.8 lens.

Thank you for the info! I am shooting kids soccer....my teenage kid! there is plenty of separation at the travel level in which she plays.
I will rent the 100-400 and see how it goes. May need to sell another lens or 2 to pick one up soon!
Thanks again everyone...and yes, it's Futbal!