Canon 70-300mm L lens

I take sports photographs and have a variety of lenses. Overall the Sigma 150-500mm is the the most versatile. However I recently purchased a Canon 70-200mm L 2.8 lens and have been astounded at the versatility and quality of the photos it can perform like a 400mm lens compared with the Sigma 150-500mm. It also has the f2.8 speed which makes it the go to lens in declining winter light. Seeking opinions from forum as to whether the Canon 70-300mm L lens would give more. Tamron make same focal length SP at 1/3 of the price.

I have not used the L version but I have the 70-300 II USM and it is a really good lens for the money, if you don't need f2.8

I also had same or similar lens not sure I or II. Sold it as not as good as Sigma 70-300mm on a Pentax k20 camera or Sigma 150-500mm on Canon 550d or 70d. Is Canon 70-300mm L as good as Canon 70-200mm L at same focal lengths? Also have Tamron 18-270mm ok lens but reviews say it is F8 lens I agree not suited to wide open F stops a good summer lens for sport.

galelegg wrote in post #18867041
I take sports photographs and have a variety of lenses. Overall the Sigma 150-500mm is the the most versatile. However I recently purchased a Canon 70-200mm L 2.8 lens and have been astounded at the versatility and quality of the photos it can perform like a 400mm lens compared with the Sigma 150-500mm. It also has the f2.8 speed which makes it the go to lens in declining winter light. Seeking opinions from forum as to whether the Canon 70-300mm L lens would give more. Tamron make same focal length SP at 1/3 of the price.

really hard to follow what you are asking

The ef 70 300 L has great image quality comparable to the 70 200 L II
BUT IT IS SLOW @5.6 @ 300

From the sound of it, a big part of what you like about the 70-200mm is the fast aperture for low light. You won't get that in the 70-300mm. If you want one lens to do what the 70-200mm is doing for you, but at a longer focal length, the only option is really the SIGMA 120-300mm f/2.8 Of course you lose 70-119mm.

ed rader wrote in post #18867769
really hard to follow what you are asking

EDIT: I found it confusing too,.

Thanks to all for replies. It is now clearer to me that the Canon 70-200mm L f2.8 is about as good as you can get for low light and reasonable focal length. For winter sports with smaller playing fields like rugby or soccer this lens is the best on a Canon 70d. It covers about 70% of the ground. I forgot the Sigma 120-300mm which would be useful but the lack of less than 120mm means you cannot get far enough away from the action when play is on your side of the ground. I did on one occassion use a Canon 100mm prime macro F2.8 lens in poor light which worked at some distances. The Sigma 150-500mm f6.3 will be the cricket lens for summer. Probably no need for a 70-300mm.