Sports and reach.

AnimalRights

Finally got the composition/timing right at Clontarf Cricket ground yesterday but my 200mm+1.4x extender only gave me a total of 280 and that is just not long enough, by the times I cropped the pictures they were soft looking.
On the Trinity Cricket pitch which is far smaller I had far sharper pictures as I didn't need to crop as much.
So basically am I better of selling the 70-200 f2.8 IS and aiming for the Canon 300 f/4 or the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS.
I know these lens are slower but for daytime they would be grand.
Well confused at this stage.

Other photographers at Clontarf had a 400 or 600!
And the 400 was said to be not long enough!!

Don't know if I'm better off selling the 70-200 to fund one of these lenses as if I get one the 70-200 really becomes defunct.
I have a 24-105 and 70-200 distance wouldn't really be required I don't think..not sure.

City-Exile

You need to position yourself to get the best with what you have.
The 70-200mm f/2.8 is more versatile than those other lenses.

DO NOT buy the 300mm f/4!
You'll be stuck with a big lens that you struggle to find use for.
It's far too restricted!

Ricky91t

What about borrowing a 2xtc off someone?See what you think of 400mm and if you like maybe go down that route!
I did kinda allready mention some of this on your thread on PI :pac:

I think you've chosen a bad sport alot of people say it isnt shot much and now we all begin to see why.
As canon primes in the 400-600 mm range don't come cheap

Paulw

It's a really tough juggle. Distance from subject, the right lens and then the price. A hard combination to get right.

There are a number of factors to consider when you go to buy a lens - will you need a faster lens (same reach) in the near future. A 300mm f/4 might be fine in the summer, but will you find a use for it in the winter? Can you afford to buy a summer lens?

The 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L lens is a very nice lens, but for floodlit events it is very slow. I have one. Great reach when the light is good.

I would try to stay away from converters, where possible. It works well on large primes, because of the quality in glass, but the 2x TC does drop you down 2 full stops, and will slow down the lens.

The best option, and sometimes the hardest, is to position yourself as close to the action as possible so you get your shots.

kensutz

A 70-200 simply won't do for cricket when you're trying to focus on the batsmen/bowler. It's ok to use for fielders catching the ball so no point in saying you need a new lens. What you need to do is concentrate on other sports that the 70-200 will suffice.

AnimalRights

Ta lads, I def wouldn't touch a 2x converter anyway.
I was as close as possible to the action yesterday, I even had my feet over the boundary rope and my Monopod right on it!!
I was also at the shorter end of the ground!!
I obviously wouldn't be photographing Cricket in the winter but suppose I should keep the 70-200 for Winter Soccer.
I should maybe try and loan a 100-400 sometime for Summer shooting.:p

Anyway was just a bit frustrated after yesterdays session ( Really happy with the action shots I got) I def need to try a diff Sport when I get back from Holidays.

and Ken as I told Paul yesterday I do actually like Cricket!

kensutz

I know you like cricket, just like myself. I was just saying to try your hand at some different things to get used to the lens itself and see its full potential. I was supposed to be at the game today but I'm shattered after running around like a lunatic yesterday and covering the Cobh and Sunderland game.