70-300L or 100-400L for motorsports?

Hey, as the title says, looking for more reach for motorsports related photography. I currently have a 70-200 f4L, and while it is a great lens, it doesn't have quite the punch that it did when I shot with crop. I shoot mostly amateur level, but sometimes go to more major events and am not able to get as close to the action as I would like. I am on a full frame body, but am also considering buying an additional crop body to help squeeze a little more reach out of the lens that I get. Even on the crop, I was usually maxing out at 200mm for a lot of shots, so thinking of these two lenses as the next upgrade. I considered the Tamron 150-600, but need a dedicated panning mode. I am leaning toward the 70-300 and picking up a crop body. Anyone have experience with both in these circumstances? Thanks!

BallerStatus wrote in post #17132018
Hey, as the title says, looking for more reach for motorsports related photography. I currently have a 70-200 f4L, and while it is a great lens, it doesn't have quite the punch that it did when I shot with crop. I shoot mostly amateur level, but sometimes go to more major events and am not able to get as close to the action as I would like. I am on a full frame body, but am also considering buying an additional crop body to help squeeze a little more reach out of the lens that I get. Even on the crop, I was usually maxing out at 200mm for a lot of shots, so thinking of these two lenses as the next upgrade. I considered the Tamron 150-600, but need a dedicated panning mode. I am leaning toward the 70-300 and picking up a crop body. Anyone have experience with both in these circumstances? Thanks!

either or. I own both. if you are shooting crop I'd imagine 300 is all you would need.

Thanks for the reply. Is the IQ much different between the two? I have read that the 300 rivals the 200 f4 for.image sharpness where the 400 is a little further behind (and has more sample variation).

Heya,

300L with a crop. Should cover all your needs. Even an inexpensive crop will do (cheap old 40D, 60D, etc). Then again, the 200 on a crop is quite a different lens (especially with a 1.4 TC). Less to buy that way.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17132179
Heya,

300L with a crop. Should cover all your needs. Even an inexpensive crop will do (cheap old 40D, 60D, etc). Then again, the 200 on a crop is quite a different lens (especially with a 1.4 TC). Less to buy that way.

Very best,

I would tend to avoid anything earlier than the 50D as a crop body for reach compared to the 5DIII. The 40D would only have 2 Mpix advantage in resolution over a cropped 5DIII. My minimum specification for a crop body for this use would be one with a 15 Mpix or better resolution sensor. So 50D or 500D (not sure which model that is in USA speak). I have rented the 100-400 in the past and been more than happy with the IQ and focus etc.

I rented the 150-600 Tamron recently and had issues panning at slow shutter speeds (1/160) with VC seeming to cause feedback vibration in recorded images. This occured at all focal lengths. With shutter speeds above 1/1000 panning worked fine. Speaking to Tamron UK it seems 1/320 (on a Nikon) works fine for panning shots for a respectable 80% hit rate.

Personally I would try renting both of the lenses you are interested in and trying them. Although I know I would pick the 100-400. You can never really have enough reach, and 150-600mm would be the perfect range for me, using a crop camera.

Alan

I use a 100-400 for the majority of my Motorsports shots and have no complaints, yeah at times the added reach of the tamron would be nice but, I haven't needed it enough to make me want to sell the 100-400L for it.

I can't speak to the 100-400L but I have and love the 70-300L. For me, it's a special lens... fast focus, beautiful photographs because of how it renders colors and its sharpness. I don't shoot motorsports, just wildlife, mostly larger wading birds here in Florida.

It does have some limitations, however. It won't take a 1.4X teleconverter or so the reports go. I just got a 400L f/5.6 and a Kenko 1.4X teleconverter but I haven't tried the Kenko on the 70-300L. I doubt I'll bother since the 400L works so well for when 300mm just isn't enough. The Kenko does slow the 400L down quite a bit: the AF has to search a bit, but it works well for stationary subjects.

I got off topic a bit there. I think a zoom would fit your needs better, of course, but I don't know if the 100-400L or the 70-300L would work better to achieve your goals. I agree with BigAl.... rent both and spend some time with each of them photographing motorsports and see which one works better for you.

Thanks everyone for your inputs and advice. I think the 70-300 on a crop body is going to win out here for what I need. I like the more traditional zoom ring instead of the push pull, the updated IS and also the smallish size.

If you don't absolutely need the 400mm, the 300L is the better lens without a doubt. Better IQ and better IS. For motorsports, I can't see you needing the 400mm on a crop.

I love the 100-400mm L, can't really imagine going back to a crop sensor since using full frame.

^I plan to keep my full frame cameras (like to have 2 full frames when on a portrait/commercial/pa​id gig) and having the crop camera dedicated to motorsports. I don't like the idea of having a bunch of cameras, but as long as each has it's purpose, it works for me. The 70-300 should work well on one of my 5D's for closer amateur stuff.

I go to various road course motorsports events every year (F1, MotoGP, United Sportscar Racing) and for the last few years, a 7D & 70-300L has been my go-to combo. Perfect lens for the majority of shooting needs. Faster AF and IQ than the 100-400 in my experience, and I owned the 100-400 before the 70-300L.

Consider though, I usually have a 2nd longer lens with me. It used to be a 400 DO (and a 400 5.6L before that), but now it's the Tamron 150-600, which I basically use as a 300-600mm lens. I got the firmware update on it, and I have no trouble panning with the VC off. I've had some great results with it.

I think the big question is what kind of motorsports you plan on doing. At many of the road courses 300mm on a crop is plenty, but at Circuit of the America's and MotoGP at Indianapolis, the reach of the Tamron is essential from some of the viewing locations.

Depends upon how close you can get to the action and how tight you want to frame your shots. If 300mm will work on whatever crop body you decide on, you'll be more happy with the 70-300 than the 100-400 due to the better IS, better IQ and smaller form factor.

But, if you need 400mm AND the crop body, you'll never be happy limited to 300mm despite the benefits of the 70-300L.

I've owned both and I don't shoot terribly long but 200mm was never enough. The 70-300L was a great compromise on focal length for me and I really appreciate the other benefits I described above.

gocolts wrote in post #17133561
I go to various road course motorsports events every year (F1, MotoGP, United Sportscar Racing) and for the last few years, a 7D & 70-300L has been my go-to combo. Perfect lens for the majority of shooting needs. Faster AF and IQ than the 100-400 in my experience, and I owned the 100-400 before the 70-300L.

Consider though, I usually have a 2nd longer lens with me. It used to be a 400 DO (and a 400 5.6L before that), but now it's the Tamron 150-600, which I basically use as a 300-600mm lens. I got the firmware update on it, and I have no trouble panning with the VC off. I've had some great results with it.

I think the big question is what kind of motorsports you plan on doing. At many of the road courses 300mm on a crop is plenty, but at Circuit of the America's and MotoGP at Indianapolis, the reach of the Tamron is essential from some of the viewing locations.

Awesome, thanks for this. I do about 75% of my motorsports shooting where the 70-300 on a crop will def have me covered (amateur drifting, rallycross, autocross) and about 25% at various races such as the MotoGP Indy (missed the last two years tho....), a few NASCAR races, Formula Drift at Road Atlanta, Indy cars at Barber. I think I am going to go with the 300 and use a Kenko 1.4x TC is neccessary and then move up to the Tamzooka if I still feel I need that much range. I really like the Tam's range, but not sure if it would suit low shutter speed pans that I like to do without the VC.

Sorry to chime in a bit late to this thread. I've used the 100-400 a handful of times and just never been really satisfied with the images from it. That's probably more user error than anything because I see a lot of other IndyCar photogs using that lens with fantastic results. However, I rented the 70-300L to shoot the weekend in Toronto this summer and absolutely fell in love with it. The focusing accuracy and color just absolutely blew me away. It's the first time I've considered saving up my pennies to buy the lens rather than continuing to rent it on an as-needed basis.