Help me! Suggest a lens!

So, I went to the Penn State vs. Notre Dame football game on Saturday.

While I got some decent shots, I wasn't really happy with a lot of my over-all shots.

Some where quite blurry, mainly because I was only able to hand hold the lens(I was in the stands).

I was using my Rebel XT and Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6. I was shooting in ISO 800 and 1600, and I still either didn't have enough shutter speed, or my hand shake is absolutely terrible.

I found myself shooting between the 200-300 zoom range quite a bit. (Hey, it happens when you're 52 rows up from the ground!)

Anyway, I was looking at a few lenses. The 100-400L from Canon, 70-200 F2.8 with a 1.4x, or the Sigma 120-300 F2.8.

Am I missing any lenses? What would be best for my setup? Should I rent one of each lens and try it out?

On a day with good light, the 100-400 is hard to beat.

If you want zoom the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 should be stellar. The 100-400 won't stop action in low light @ f/5.6. If weight is an issue the 70-200 should be lighter than the Sigma (at a guess) and might be 'ok' as a 280mm @ f/4.


Edit: must add, will you get such large lenses into these venues?!

Chris R/T wrote in post #3907355
100-400L from Canon, 70-200 F2.8 with a 1.4x, or the Sigma 120-300 F2.8

Without question the 120-300 f2.8 (on a monopod). Of course, it's the heaviest and most expensive too of your listed options.

Pete-eos wrote in post #3907381
If you want zoom the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 should be stellar. The 100-400 won't stop action in low light @ f/5.6. If weight is an issue the 70-200 should be lighter than the Sigma (at a guess) and might be 'ok' as a 280mm @ f/4.

Edit: must add, will you get such large lenses into these venues?!

They didn't stop me or even say a word with the 70-300 on a Rebel XT, so I'm assuming they wouldn't say anything with something slightly larger.

LightRules wrote in post #3907385
Without question the 120-300 f2.8 (on a monopod). Of course, it's the heaviest and most expensive too of your listed options.

I didn't realize how expensive it was until I just looked at B&H. That lens is DEFINTELY out for me. I'd prefer to keep things around 1500 USD.

What about the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 + 1.4x TC?

Should do you well, you don't need IS to stop action and should be usable, should leave you more money to get closer seats

....closer seats are alot more expensive lol

Tickets were selling for 1200 USD/seat!! I got mine for 50 and they were pretty good seats, I was lower level, 52 second row. There was still another 10 rows behind me, AND, two more levels above me!

Chris R/T wrote in post #3907424
They didn't stop me or even say a word with the 70-300 on a Rebel XT, so I'm assuming they wouldn't say anything with something slightly larger.

I didn't realize how expensive it was until I just looked at B&H. That lens is DEFINTELY out for me. I'd prefer to keep things around 1500 USD.

I know you've already said it's out, but you might not have noticed the 120-300/2.8 is not SLIGHTLY larger than the 70-300. Sure, they both go to 300mm, but the f/2.8 is a beast in comparison. Physics alone (i.e. f/2.8 v f/5.6) dictates that the front element has to be twice as wide. Also because the light entering the edges of that wide front element have to be bent more, fast telephotos tend to be longer than equivalent slower ones (Canon's 400/2.8 is almost 50% longer than the 400/5.6).

Just thought you'd be interested to know!

Thanks for that tidbit I figured it was bigger, just didn't know how much

So, I'm kind of stuck between the Sigma and Canon 70-200 F2.8's.

IS does not stop action.
IS WILL help prevent user motion.
Use it if you got it.

My problem stems from, I believe, user motion/camera/hand shake.