Need a little lense advice

slyone wrote in post #2252428
I guess either a prime 200L f2.8 or a 70-200 (L?) on an XT would be worth the cost/upgrade from my Pro1 28-200L f2.4-3.5 camera?
If yes, how valuable is the IS if I just use "the stick"

One thing you have to keep in mind when you shoot sports. It isn't cheap.

IS really isn't that valuable for sports shooting with the exception of panning. It's designed to allow handholding at lower shutter speeds, and you want a fast shutter speed to freeze action. And while the f/2.8 apertures are great for field sports, you'll need a faster prime for shooting indoors. High school gyms are often lighted like dungeons!

Get a decent flash.

canonloader wrote in post #2252510
Get a decent flash.

Not for sports. You need higher shutter speeds and high ISO instead. Most schools discourage the use of flash and IHSA forbids it. The exception would be stand or ceiling-mounted strobes, which are expensive.

My main reason for the whole Dslr is to get very good shots of my kids when their playing HS football and soccer. The season has ended now but most games held late in the season are at night. Therefore, never having used any...f4 would be fine for daytime but not nighttime. f2.8 would be required for night games and work fine for day as well correct?

slyone wrote in post #2252609
f2.8 would be required for night games and work fine for day as well correct?

correct. it also is preferable for day games because it helps give a thinner depth of field to isolate the subject, since sports often has unsightly distracting backgrounds.

Thanks! I'm trying to simplfy wher/what I want to be at. It also sounds like I want 200mm focal length for "these conditions" whether it be a prime or zoom (70x200). now what would be the next question? L or not- or IS or not, I "assume" an L is more important than IS? Again, just trying to see realistically the best choices since a 70x200L IS just seems so very far away from where I am money wise.

slyone wrote in post #2252959
Thanks! I'm trying to simplfy wher/what I want to be at. It also sounds like I want 200mm focal length for "these conditions" whether it be a prime or zoom (70x200). now what would be the next question? L or not- or IS or not, I "assume" an L is more important than IS? Again, just trying to see realistically the best choices since a 70x200L IS just seems so very far away from where I am money wise.

IS is unimportant for sports. you are going to be trying for high shutter speeds (1/500th and up perferably) so 2.8 is MUCH more important than IS. of course if you can afford both then there is no down side to it. but the 70-200 2.8 L is a fine lens and i love it for sports (after my 300 2.8 of course).

Great, we're narrowing it down! As far as the L verses non-L glass? Does the additional cost make the difference with IQ?

slyone wrote in post #2252998
Great, we're narrowing it down! As far as the L verses non-L glass? Does the additional cost make the difference with IQ?

well the only other lens out there thats really worth compairing it to is a 70-200 2.8 sigma. im sure its a fine lens, but i think the canon has slightly faster AF and IQ.

I used the Sigma 70-200 and the 200L on the sidelines of the football games this year. Both are excellent lenses, though the prime has much better image quality and autofocus.