Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 26, 2010, 11:17 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
velocitycurve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 22
Default Young kids & their activities - which lens?

Good morning everyone,

I have a 50D and an 18-55 2.8, which has been magnificent for shooting my young kids (pre-school, kindergarden) indoors when they're running around. I also have a 12-24 that has really scratched my itch when I'm shooting vistas and panaromic views outside.

Both were recommendations of the good folk here so I'm hoping you can help out once again.

Those same rambunctious munchkins are now starting activities like ice skating, starting dance, soccer - and I'm finding that the 18-55 is starting to feel a bit short. I've been able to crop here and there but that's not the answer for me... so I think its time to pick up another set of glass.

I'm thinking 70-200 2.8 but I'm no expert... am I far off?

Suggestions and recommendations would be very welcome.
velocitycurve is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 26, 2010, 11:22 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by velocitycurve View Post
... I'm thinking 70-200 2.8 but I'm no expert... am I far off?
I think that will work until they get older and the soccer field gets larger. The 70-200mm f/4 would work as well for the children's soccer, but not for the indoor stuff.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2010, 11:32 AM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

That's certainly the right direction to look, if the light is really poor then a faster prime lens (85mm f1.8, 100mm f2, 135mm f2) would be helpful but less convenient.
__________________
[SIZE=1][SIZE=2]Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2010, 1:06 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
velocitycurve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 22
Default

Mmmmm.

Pricey

Obviously the benchmark is Canon's own 70-200 - I'd probably be very happy with the first generation version. Any real-life experiences with the Sigma & Tamron versions of the same?

A colleague loves his Sigma but cautions that copy-to-copy variance in quality might be a factor.
velocitycurve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2010, 1:11 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
pbjunkiee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pensacola Fl
Posts: 914
Default

I would look at getting a used 70-200 f4l off of keh, i just orderd myself a "bgn" nikon 70-200 2.8 vr, and the only thing it has on it is one tiny scratch on the body, but everything else is perfect. I think you can grab a f4l for around or under 600 every now and then from keh.

Good Luck!

Jeff
__________________
SportsShooter
www.85zero.com
pbjunkiee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2010, 1:22 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

KEH.com is an excellent source of used lenses.

The Canon 70-200mm f/4 would do ok for the children's soccer, but it's not fast enough for all the indoor stuff.

Canon's 70-200/2.8 is excellent, and can work well with a good 1.4X teleconverter when your children get older and start playing on larger fields. The Sigma and Tamron "equivalents" aren't as good, and a teleconverter will magnify the flaws.

That's a tough call. I'm glad it's not mine to make.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 2:37 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

i would definitely add a flash.....may be a sigma 70-200 and flash if money is a concern. Else the sigma 100-300 with a flash....better range and faster shutter with the flash
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 4:57 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
velocitycurve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 22
Default

Luckily the flash is taken care off - I've got a 580EXII so that's in the bag.

Meh, its not sounding cheap whatever I go with. So it comes down to putting down a second mortgage on my home

Well thanks guys. I guess it pretty much confirms the loud noise that was gibbering madly in the back of my mind...
velocitycurve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 5:28 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 11
Default

I'm looking at the new Tamron SP 70-300 Di VC USD lens. It's hasn't been released for Canon yet but I'm hoping soon. The Nikon version has gotten good reviews.

The last two weekends I was shooting my grandchildren at their soccer games using my old Panasonic Lumix with a 35mm equivalent of 420mm. I couldn't get as close as I wanted in some of the shots. I already have a Canon 55-250 but haven't tried it yet for soccer because it's reach is less than the Panasonic's. I did try it at my grandson's baseball game and couldn't always get as close as I wanted.

I find 75+% of my shooting is beyond 150mm. I prefer candid shots so I'm always standing back at a distance shooting people.

So if your aren't in a hurry then the new Tamron might be worth a look. Amazon is taking pre-orders for $449 less $50 rebate for a final $399. No tax and no shipping makes it a good deal except for the uncertainty of when it will arrive. My guess is they will release it for the Christmas shopping season.
Gary S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2010, 9:11 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
JustinThyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 361
Default

Im not such a cheap spender and would definitely go for the 70-200 2.8 IS, Used can be bought now at about $1400 at many online B&S boards for mint condtion copies and go down from there, I usually get used gear from other sources for less than what KEH offers to buy them for and resell for a profit. The 70-200 is an awsome candid photo choice where you can stand back a little and get them in their natural state. I have 2, one that hams it up and the other that turns to a block of ice. When you start getting to outdoor fields the lenngth needed goes up. Soccer requires a minimum 300mm with 400mm on the large sided fields. The 300 f4 and 400 5.6 are OK in sunny conditions with the 300 being OK in clouds too. To go under the lights or heavily overcast you have to get off the wallet with the 2.8 versions. One can normally invest in a used lens and sell it later for what the payed for it or very close and in some instances even make a small profit when retail prices go up.
I dont know if its allowed to post to the other sites B&S boards but if you have an inquiry feel free to PM me. I have about $20K in gear laying around and only a small portion was bought new. None of the bodies or glass was bought new and they are all in mint condition for a significant savings.
JustinThyme is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:01 AM.