# Suggestion for High School Football lens on 5D3



## fatshark (Aug 8, 2013)

I'm upgrading from a 30D to the 5D3. I've been shooting with the 70-200 2.8 IS for many years and LOVE IT. However when paired with the 2x TC on the 30D it's somewhat useless for football and figure skating due to slow AF.

As i step up to FF on the 5D3 I am considering moving to the 300 f4 IS to at least replicate the 'reach' I had on my old crop sensor + 70-200. 

Does anyone have a recommendation on lenses they prefer for football? Keep in mind this is typically night games with spotty lighting conditions. What I've been considering is:

1) 300 f4 IS
2) 100-400 f4-5.6
3) Dump the 2x TC II and buy the 1.4x TC III

If there are any preferences for any of these choices or have another suggestion I'd really appreciate your insight. My first choice would be to go to the 300 f2.8 ii but i want to keep my spend under $2K for whichever solution I go with. 

Additionally, does anyone have experience with the 300 f4 and either the 2x TC II or the 1.4x TC III?


----------



## JPBones73 (Aug 8, 2013)

I've had the opportunity to shoot both HS and Division I football, including bowl games at night. The 300 2.8 is the standard, and a 400 2.8 with a FF body would be appropriate. You need a fast lens at night, and even at 2.8 you'll be bumping up the ISO to 800+. At a high school field, you might hit 1250 or 1600 even when wide open if you want to freeze the action or avoid motion blur that is distracting rather than "good" motion.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 8, 2013)

A 400mm f/2.8 is the standard sports lens (on FF). You mention a 70-200 +2X on a crop body, that's a field of view equivalent to 640mm which seems a bit extreme.
Are you sure you need such a long focal length? Are you on the sidelines or up in the stands? If so, a 600mm f/4 is what you want, and that's waaaay out of your budget.

This is one case where a 7D and Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 might be a good choice due to faster AF. Extenders really are not good for fast AF. You can get good deals on the previous version of the lens, but the new one is $3500.


----------



## nonac (Aug 8, 2013)

I've taken some great shots with my 5d3 and a 70-200 2.8 Mk II. you will find that you can crop quite a bit with the images from the 5d3 and still have excellent results. a couple pics i posted here are at the link below. 

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10343.0


----------



## swampler (Aug 8, 2013)

On most of the fields I shoot at, I can get by with the 100-400 with my 5D Mk III. On the fields with the really bad lighting, then I stick with the 70-200 f/2.8 and either heavily crop, or get the action that comes my way.


----------



## TexPhoto (Aug 8, 2013)

The 300 f4 is a great lens!, but for sports it's probably only a good lens. For night sports f2.8 is way ahead of f4.

Obviously the problem is $$$. The ideal football combo is probably 2 bodies, and a 400mm f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8. (IS or no, I or II)

On the bright side. you already have one of those lenses. If you could stretch to a 300 2.8, used, off brand etc... But I'd keep the 70-200. Likewise the 1.4X III. It's a good choose, keep the 2X if you can.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 11, 2013)

Are you not allowed to use flash? I know it is tough when the players are really far away, but when they are say 10 to 15 yards away, the flash should be able to reach and illuminate the action. High speed sync will allow for shutter speeds in excess of 1/1000 of a second and if you are able to use a decent diffuser, you won't have a ton of glare shooting back at you. 

Also... where are you allowed to set up? Just passed the endzone... are you able to get down towards the goal line or are you forced to stay along the sidelines between the twenties (which would be awful). 

Sure the f/2.8's are great... but I would be hard pressed to spend $5000+ on something like that. 

Have you considered the 135mm f/2L it doesn't have the reach, but if you are able to be near the endzone, it might get you the all important extra stop of light, it costs less than a $1000, and it is reasonably fast in regards to auto focus.


----------



## jasonsim (Aug 11, 2013)

I suggest ditching the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS and 2x III for the new 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II & 1.4x III converter. This is an awesome lens!!!

Then if you want a prime , I'd recommend a 300mm f/2.8L IS II.

I shoot lots of ice skating and the version 2 70-200mm f/2.8L IS is my go to lens for that. Sometimes I will use the 135mm f/2L.

Hope this helps

--Jason


----------



## fatshark (Aug 13, 2013)

Jasonism - how does the 70-200 v2 + 1.4TC impact focus speed while shooting skating? My 70-200v1 +2x is nearly useless in that environment.


----------



## jasonsim (Aug 13, 2013)

fatshark said:


> Jasonism - how does the 70-200 v2 + 1.4TC impact focus speed while shooting skating? My 70-200v1 +2x is nearly useless in that environment.



Well, hard to say since I've only shot ice skating with the bare 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. But given my experience with both the 300mm f/4L IS and 100-400mm L IS, their focus speed pales when compared to the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II + 1.4x III. 

70-200mm II bare:












With the 5D3 + 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II + 2x, I had no trouble capturing birds in flight. So I don't think you will have trouble using it with the 1.4x III.

5d3 with 70-200L II + 2x III:






Hope this helps with you decision. 

--Jason


----------

