Kids sports lens?

I want to get a lens to use to take pictures at my son's sporting events for the next few years. He's 4 and plays t-ball and soccer, and will soon be taking karate. I have a 17-85 IS and Tamron 75-300. The Tamron is so super slow to focus, I'm not happy with it at all. I'm torn trying to figure out what to replace it with. I'm not a pro, and don't really want to spend $1700 or whatever for a 70-200 2.8IS, so I'm looking at 70-300 IS, 70-200 F4 IS, 70-200 2.8 Non IS.

So I guess I'm asking will I be happy with the sub $600 70-300IS, or should I bite the bullet and get the 70-200 F4 IS, or 70-200 2.8 Non IS. If one of the 70-200's which one is best for kids sports?

You are going to be fairly close to your son's action for the next 5 years. For anything that your son is doing, whether indoors or out, I would offer a suggestion for the 85 1.8 (sometimes known as the "kid's lens). It would be absolutely perfect for capturing your son in action no matter where he is or what he is doing. When he's in school it's perfect for plays, shows, etc.

You seem to be headed towards a zoom and the lenses you have mentioned are great. The 70 -200 F4 might struggle indoors without flash.

The 85 1.8 is a great bargain at 350 +- dollars.

Just my opinion and food for thought.

70-200/4 has served me well with kids sports for the past several years. I have not missed IS and have appreciated the IQ quality that the lens affords over the consumer lenses. Only your mention of Karate (indoors) makes me think that the 70-200/2.8 might be a better choice. It is a substantially heavier lens for holding for extended periods at sports events. Although I have a 2.8 now, I still take the 4.0 to many events for its easier use.

I'm a newbie as well and want better pics of my own(who are teenagers)at their various sporting events. You're certainly at the right place because there are so many "pro's" around here that can and do advise on proper options! That being said, I have the 7-2 f/2.8L non-IS arriving hopefully tommorrow but find I may just spring for the Sigma 17-70f/2.8-4.5? for a general use. The Sigma is relatively inexpensive($400.00). read about it here. I'm sure the very competent photographers will weigh in with your best solution though...

My 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS has served me really well for all of my 7 and 9 year old boys's indoor and outdoor activities. Trust me, you'll be shooting lots of indoor events when your child starts K through elementary school.

I have a 17-85 IS, and I must be lucky cause I don't seem to get any CA, and I've tried to get it to happen. I live in the country so I'm not often taking pictures at 17mm so barrel distortion hasn't effected me either. I also have a 50mm 1.4, and a 1.4x tc that I have used with it and got ok results, so I'm not sure I would use a 85 1.8 much.

I took pictures all through high school and collage with just a 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, and 300mm manual everything lens and seemed to do ok. But after getting the 17-85 and crappy 75-300 lens, I discovered how handy having a zoom can be.

I think the f/2.8 is a must for sports. Along with the Canon's, I would consider the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. It is a great lens at a good price. I have seen them as low as $780.00 (ALOT cheaper than I paid for mine <sigh>.

My vote is for 70-200/2.8 non-IS.

SYS wrote in post #2426607
My 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS has served me really well for all of my 7 and 9 year old boys's indoor and outdoor activities. Trust me, you'll be shooting lots of indoor events when your child starts K through elementary school.

That's what I'm really leaning toward,but the IS just sounds so neat. I guess I just need to find a really good deal on a 2.8 IS.

I just went thru T-ball and soccer. Since these are usually during the day, any one of the you listed would do. For karate, I don't think any of them will be wide enough .

safehaven wrote in post #2426639
I think the f/2.8 is a must for sports. Along with the Canon's, I would consider the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. It is a great lens at a good price. I have seen them as low as $780.00 (ALOT cheaper than I paid for mine <sigh>.

Do they focus fast? I know it's leagues apart, but I had one of the sub $100 SIGMA 28-70mm F2.8-4 DG and it took longer to focus and take a picture than my 6 year old casio 3mp camera did, and this tamron 75-300 that I have seems even slower that it. Even the relative cheap 17-85 IS is what I consider fast to focus.

I've heard the Sigma's AF is similar to Canon's. But I still bought a Canon

85 1.8 hands down i use mine for my daughters karate tournaments and couldn t be happier...waiting for my 70-200f/4l on x-mas morning

stevek71 wrote in post #2427241
85 1.8 hands down i use mine for my daughters karate tournaments and couldn t be happier...waiting for my 70-200f/4l on x-mas morning

I have a 50 1.4, and a 1.4x tc, I really don't think I would get a lot better pictures with an 85 1.8 than with that combo.

The 70-200 is a great lens for sports, but....as mentioned above you probably won't like f/4 if you follow indoor sports. I have a 70-210 f/4 that I used alot with 800 film and always struggled with indoor lighting. Digital + ISO 1600 helps, but not as much as f/2.8 would (or a 200mm f/2)