What focal length?

I'm thinking about taking on sport photograghy, and just before i "donate" my life saving to Canon, i'd like to make sure i make the right purchase.

For football matches, what focal length would be ideal to cover the full pitch? as u only stay on one side, and i already have a 70-200 to cover the goal action (the one that is close to me).

For tennis, is 70-200mm enough to cover the whole court? or do i need longer range?

For motor racing, i know this is gonna be a killer, which focal length would be enough?

regards

i shoot kid's sports - mostly rugby league, which is nice as i get to stand on the sideline. i use a Bigma (50-500) on a monopod and find that if i'm moving up and down the field, it's great. if i am looking to capture action across and down the field (or if i'm standing at the end of the field shooting towards the oncoming action from midfield), even with the crop factor i find i have to crop. but then the shots i'm taking - often the feet aren't as important and parents love pictures of their kids with the ball and lots of hands and arms trying to tackle their son (or daughter!). if i'm getting a full body shot or several kids, it's more than enough. to be honest, though... i think your 200 may be a bit short.

i'm lucky in that i shoot during daylight so the Bigma's relatively slow aperature is still great. if you are shooting day or night, you may want something faster.

with your gridiron, would you be shooting from the stands? or would you be on the sideline? i have never shot tennis so i can't comment. and i will definitely defer the motorsport questions to Jim or Kenny.

I really like the Sigma 120-300 2.8 and if I want to see the sweat add the 1.4tc and your 480mm. Boo-ya baby! I go noplace with out my Phat beast.

THE Sports lens is a 300mm f/2.8 Prime... it is the De~facto...

However.. some do prefer the flexibility of a zoom.. and the aforementioned Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 is taking a lot of shooters by surprise...

Offering Prime quality images from a high end fast zoom.

If this price range is out of the question Sigma makes another fantastic 300mm zoom.. the 100-300mm f/4

But arguably.. this range could be had with a 70-200mm f/2.8 and a 1.4X t-con.

i have to wonder if i'd be better off getting the 70-200 f/2.8 rather then the 100-400 for highschool football.

Not that i dont intend on using the lens elsewhere, but these photos will be important to me for sure.

If the 120-300 where a little cheaper i would have no problem buying that one.

As I have the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8EX aforementioned, there are no complaints that anyone w/ a 300mm F2.8 lens wouldn't have like weight and cost. I'm not bothered about either one.

It is a huge lens with a huge reach. It is incredible what you can get from that lens!

Just my opinion, but ....

If your high school stadium is lit as poorly as our high school stadium, you'll need every bit of that 2.8 lens ....

I've got the 100-400 and, while it's great for daylight action - lacrosse, soccer, baseball, tennis, etc. - I have to admit that it pretty much sucks after the sun goes down and you have to depend on football stadium lighting for light .....

As I said, this is just my opinion, but I would go for just about any telephoto or tele-zoom that's a 2.8 over the 100-400 for high school stadium lighting .....

Show me some examples (especially at f/2.8), maybe after some it'll start becoming more my budget

Can I get some clarification...is it you want to see what it can do at F2.8, or are you taking about a lightweight F2.8 lens of this size? I think around F8ish is the sweet spot.

seems to me that 300mm f2.8 prime is THE lens in sports photography, but what about when object is out of its reach? i'm not sure how far will a 300mm cover, can anyone show me a sample picture of it? preferrably on one end of a football pitch, and point towards the other end @ 300mm

You know it is funny, I was talking with this other soccer dad today who is the head of photography for the paper here in Seattle and he was shooting a 400 2.8. He looked at my lens and said that really is the best over all range for this kind of sport. I felt kind of good when he has a pool of lenses that is as deep as the ocean at his picking.

TC