100-400 or 70-200 +1.4

[Jim Flavin]

Sorry - I have seen threads like this before - but I cant find them by search . I am going to an outdoor game on saturday - and was wondering which combination would be the best . Sport = gaelic football/hurling - pitch slight bigger than soccer pitch . Will be shooting from stands . Weather forecast = ok but game will be going on til 8.45 pm so light may be probematic .There is artifical lighting - but being a provincail venue - not up to the bigger venues . Was going to use on 60d . The longer reach would be nice - and there is a one stop differnce in f stop ?. My question is will the IQ from the 70-200 + 1.4 extender matc/ beat that from 100-400 . Also if I bought a x2 extender - would that combo beat the 100--400 mm ??. i aslo have a 5D2 - which I wasgoing to use for genral shots with 24-105 . I could switch my lens setup ? - any thoughts ,
Thanks ,
Jim Flavin
--
jim flavin

 

[IlanLCD]

2X + 70-200 Avoid.

70-200 + 1.4X, great combo. 100-400 also great lens. If you need the extra zoom go with the 400.

 

[John_A_G]

280mm is going to be woefully short. You'd find it short if you were right on the edge of such a large pitch. You'll need every bit of 400mm and you'll find that is too short. As mentioned by the other poster, 70-200 plus 2x is worse performing than 100-400.

 

[smertz]

There are a few issues that no equipment purchase will overcome. For a playing field that large, shooting from the stands will net you shots that won't convey enough tight action to make it worth spending a lot of money on good glass. So if you can arrange a field-level pass and shoot along the sidelines it will enable you to have the capacity for getting much better shots.

If you can do that, then you will have some more challenges. Image quality criteria for sports is different from say landscapes. You need to have a fast enough lens to capture action. In regular good daylight the 100-400mm lens will work fairly well. It's a good general lens for this. But if you are shooting under artificial light or as darkness falls, then you need the f2.8 of the 70-200mm. A TC will knock a stop or two off, so factor that in.

The 5D Mk2 will help with shooting speed, but the 60D will help with both AF response and perceived reach. I'd use them both and see what works during pre-game practice.

Your field of effective capture with the 70-200mm will be noticeably less too, so concentrate on closer in action that fills up at least half the frame.

SmertZ

 

[Jim Flavin]

thanks for comments . Forgot to mention that the 70-200 IS is the Mk 2 - but will see in the first game etc . Yes - I used get field passes to games - not at this venue - at a much bigger venue - but its hard now to get passes - but will pursue that avaenue again . I can go low down on stand [ near pitch ] - but obviosly cant move around etc . thanks again - interteting to know the 2x extender and the 70-200 not as good as 100-400.
Jim Flavin
--
jim flavin

 

[pdqgp]

Sorry - I have seen threads like this before - but I cant find them by search . I am going to an outdoor game on saturday - and was wondering which combination would be the best . Sport = gaelic football/hurling - pitch slight bigger than soccer pitch . Will be shooting from stands . Weather forecast = ok but game will be going on til 8.45 pm so light may be probematic .There is artifical lighting - but being a provincail venue - not up to the bigger venues . Was going to use on 60d . The longer reach would be nice - and there is a one stop differnce in f stop ?. My question is will the IQ from the 70-200 + 1.4 extender matc/ beat that from 100-400 . Also if I bought a x2 extender - would that combo beat the 100--400 mm ??. i aslo have a 5D2 - which I wasgoing to use for genral shots with 24-105 . I could switch my lens setup ? - any thoughts ,
Thanks ,

You'll be fine with the 100-400 even in lower light. You'll be more challenged by not being right on the field when shooting than by light levels. I shoot soccer and T-ball with it and it's great.

--
-tim

NW Columbus/Dublin, Ohio
Family Photo Site
http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro

RIP Sir Ares of Sedgewick 2000-2010
RIP our Sweet Lady Jasmine II 1997-2008

 

[Keith Z Leonard]

I shot the 70-200 f4 L + 1.4x converter for a while and got good results, but the reach wasn't quite there, so I picked up a 100-400 and it's just great. The only downside to me is weight, which is probably not a big difference for you if you are shooting the f2.8 II version of the 70-200.

 

[Jim Flavin]

Thanks again for comments . Yes the place to be is on sideline ot at goalmouth . When I was there before - had no motordrive - now with digital it would be very interetsing to fire some bursts - a lot can go on when ball drops among a group of players or near goalmouth !!. Will work on that - altho getting onto some venues is now near impossible - . Will use the 100-400 .
--
jim flavin

 

[Jim Flavin]

I used the 100-400 m m and was not in genral folcal l ltd . excpet for real close ups . i will attch a few PBase sized shots - would be gald of any comnet . The one adavntage of being in stand is u see more [ in a way ]- than looking thro a ruck of players - but of course you I miss the close up goal action . Some of the shots look foreshortened . Sir Alf Ramsey [ England coach ] in 1966 world cup win - always went to stands for a better view . I was near midfield - pitch - 150- 160 Yds long . One tip I found out - if I go to stands again - is book an end seat - totally free on one side at least . Will try at one large ground for a sideline place ,
Thanks ,
Jim Flavin
all shots at http://www.pbase.com/jflavin/wexford_v_kilkenny

































--
jim flavin