Comparing the 70(80)-200 F2.8 Lenses

I'm looking for some advice on the 70-200 F2.8 lens options from forum members with experience of them.

I'm looking to shoot Futsal (indoor 6-a-side football/soccer). The light is generally poor (weak and artificial), with the field size around that of a netball or basketball court.

I've an a55 and have used the trusty Minolta 50mm F1.7 in previous years, due to its wide aperture. Slower lenses such as the beercan or kit 55-200 don't really 'cut it' for such a situation.

So, I'm thinking I'll bite-the-bullet and buy one of the 70/80-200 F2.8 lenses. In an ideal world I'd grab the Sony, but its very expensive (over $2k); so I'm considering alternates.

I'm looking for three key attributes:

•  Fast AF, including in low light
  
• Sharp wide open at F2.8
• Decent colour reproduction (ideally Minolta lens like)

The options I've identified are:

• Quantaray 70-200 2.8 APO
• Tokina 80-200 F2.8 ATX Pro AF
• Minolta AF 80-200 F2.8 APO (the black lens)
• Minolta HS AF APO 80-200 F2.8 (the white lens)
• Tamron SP AF 70-200 F2.8
• Sigma APO 70-200 F2.8
• Sony 70-200 G F2.8

Of course there is quite a lot of information about the last 3 lenses as they are all currently in production. Further, of course, the dyxum lens database has quite a lot of information about all 7 lenses.

What I'm unclear on is the relative performance of the lenses. How does the AF speed vary between the lenses (in particular how does the AF speed of early lenses such as the Tokina or Minoltas compare to today's Sony or the Sigma), or what is the image quality of the Tokina like?

Thanks for any and all replies and advice.