Need help picking a lens.

I have a Digital Rebel that I am currently using a Canon 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 lens to shoot my kids sporting events with. I am somewhat happy with it but since I will be trying my hand in shooting local baseball games for profit then I don't think it will be enough. I have a budget up to $600.00 and I have these three lenses picked out. Any of them decent enough? Or do you have any suggestions? Thanks!!!!

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 EF IS Image Stabilizer USM

Sigma Zoom Telephoto 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO Aspherical Autofocus Lens

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbacklund

I have a Digital Rebel that I am currently using a Canon 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 lens to shoot my kids sporting events with. I am somewhat happy with it but since I will be trying my hand in shooting local baseball games for profit then I don't think it will be enough. I have a budget up to $600.00 and I have these three lenses picked out. Any of them decent enough? Or do you have any suggestions? Thanks!!!!

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens

Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 EF IS Image Stabilizer USM

Sigma Zoom Telephoto 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO Aspherical Autofocus Lens

---

I have the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 EF IS Image Stabilizer USM that I use with my DRebel. I used it last weekend at the high school football game, and really wished it was a faster lens. I upped the ISO to 1600 to be able to shoot at a higher shutter speed. Here are some examples from that night, straight out of the camera (I shoot RAW so I converted these to jpeg using default settings). I was standing at the fence, just outside the track and about equal to the front of the bleachers, off to the right side. These are not very good pictures, but I wanted to demonstrate results at each focal length, everything else being equal. The third one is a shot all the way across the field to the opposing side bleachers.

Here are my stats for each pic:

Shooting Mode
Manual
Tv(Shutter Speed)
1/160
Av(Aperture Value)
6.3
ISO Speed
1600
Lens
75.0 - 300.0mm
Focal Length

First shot: 170.0mm Second shot: 220.0mm Third shot: 300.0mm

Hope this helps!

70-200F4L and a monopod :)

that will put you over $600 slightly, BUT you will LOVE it.

the 70-300 is a variable aperture lens, the front element extends while focusing(I think), no UD glass(which L lenses have), no lens hood included, no soft case either, no full time manual focus....

70-200F4L.... focuses 1 foot closer, lens hood/ soft case included, internal zoom/focus , L glass, same weight relatively, tripod foot AVAILABLE(though it's $120), faster focus motor, focus limiter(I think)

Thanks Kelly! Does the Image Stabilizer work well for you? I have noticed that some of my images are somewhat blurred but not many of them. Plus, I don't want to give up distance so that lens looks like a good "cheap" upgrade. I would love to buy the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM or a Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

70-200F4L and a monopod :)

that will put you over $600 slightly, BUT you will LOVE it.

the 70-300 is a variable aperture lens, the front element extends while focusing(I think), no UD glass(which L lenses have), no lens hood included, no soft case either, no full time manual focus....

70-200F4L.... focuses 1 foot closer, lens hood/ soft case included, internal zoom/focus , L glass, same weight relatively, tripod foot AVAILABLE(though it's $120), faster focus motor, focus limiter(I think)

---

Paul, is a tripod collar included with that setup?

NEITHER lens has a tripod collar, nor do you DEFINATELY need one. the collar would help balance slightly and make vertical to horiziontal adjustments EASIER.

I shoot a 100-400L IS and can tell you this...

IS (2ND generation on 100-400, 1ST on 75-300) is a great tool when needed, but DON'T rely on it.

the tripod foot to me is hardly used(HAND HELD), but the lens is 4POUNDS ? , so one is A MUST on this sized lens for tripod mounting.

L glass makes images crisper, warmer, sharper.... though PS can warm an image too.

jback, I don't often notice it unless I'm shooting in very low light with a slow shutter speed. I've definitely gotten clear images at much slower speeds than otherwise. I haven't done any real tests though to compare with and without, although I have turned it off sometimes but I haven't really studied the differences. I'll have to do that.

I like the lens, except for two things: I wish it was faster, and I wish it was an L series. But it's not because I didn't want to pay for that. :( My dream lens is the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, but at over $1200 I'm just not ready for it.

If you do get the lens I have, order it online from B&H. It's cheaper than dealers.

Oh, here's a shot I took with this lens at 1/125 f5.0 with the IS on. I have sharpened it in photoshop, but only for cosmetic enhancement.

http://forums.photographyreview.com/...ighlight=piano

Wow, beautiful shot! I think I will go with that lens. I really don't have the money and I need the IS feature. Thanks for all your help.

I would love to see comparison shots taken with the other lenses. I would love to see what an L lens could do.