Originally Posted by mike_d
The 70-200 - yes, the 70-300 - no. You said this is for sports, so you need the fastest lens you can get = wide max. aperture.
The 70-200 has constant f/4 aperture while the 70-300 at the long end is only f/5.6 - that is one stop slower than the 70-200... which equals to TWICE less light!
Ahh... That makes sense. Yeah this lens will be used for my sons soccer but for other things as well that is why i thought the 70-300 IS would be good too because it has the IS and the lower end L lens doesn't.
<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]The IS will be great for the "other things" but for sports such as children’s soccer you'll probably want a shutter speed at around 1/250 to stop the action. At shutter speeds that fast the IS won't be very helpful but if you are taking shots of the huddle or where the subjects aren't moving too quickly the IS will really shine because you'll be able to shoot at speeds at around 1/30 which is way too slow to handhold the 70-200 f/4 non IS. Some people can hand-hold at slower shutter speeds but the rule of 1/focal length is a great rule of thumb. Remember that rule was created based on 35mm film/sensors so you will need to apply the 1.6X FOVCF to your Canon T1i. Here's an example:<o></o
<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]To hand-hold a 200mm lens on a 35mm sensor you would need a shutter speed of 1/200<o
<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: #000000; font-family: Verdana;"]To hand-hold a 200mm lens on a 1.6X FOVCFsensor you would need a shutter speed of 1/320 (200 * 1.6)
Try and go to a shop and try them. I think you will go for the 70-200mm 4L when you can have a go with it. Also remember that the more light that comes in the faster the focusing. The ideal one would be the 70-200mm 2.8 or the 70-200mm 2.8 IS, if you had the cash, these let intwice the light in over the 4L and with xxD cameras which have a more sensitive focus point for f2.8 and lower means better focusing. The 70-200mm 2.8 is not much more than the70-300mm IS DO. I know someone who had the DO and is trading it in for the 7-200mm 2.8 IS now.
The 70-200mm 4L is amazing for the cost, thezoom ring is so smooth on it and when I used it for horse events it was so easy to zoom in and out, far better than the 24-105mm IS 4L which is the other lens I have. I now have upgraded my 4Lto the 2.8 IS which will now last for a long time. The thing is with the 2.8 IS, is that the IS is like the 100-400mm L, it has 2 options, one is nomal and the other is forpanning.
I think the image quality of the 55-250 is about equal with the 70-300, at overlapping focal lengths. Look at these two comparisons:
70-300 (sample 1) vs 55-250 at 200mm f/5.6
70-300 (sample 2) vs 55-250 at 200mm f/5.6
The 70-300 is a full-frame lens, that's why it costs more for the same quality.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote