Why the 70-200 is the ideal indoor sports lens

I posted last week that I love the 200 F2.8 prime for shooting basketball from the stands. That's true, but the 70-200 F2.8L IS II would be even better. I have the lens, but am not allowed to use it in Coors Events Center (the University of Colorado basketball arena), because it's too long (there's a six inch length limit on lenses). I shot the 200 prime from the twentieth row about mid-court last Wednesday, and was pleased with the results, but still had to do quite a bit of cropping. On Saturday, I got to go to the game against Jackson State. This time, I was near the corner, and only 6 rows up, behind the CU bench. Now I was too close for some of the shots! The zoom would have been ideal here. Here's a sequence where I would have liked to be able to zoom back a bit to get the whole body in the frame:

I still managed quite a few shots I was pleased with, though.

I was practically close enough to hear what the coach (Tad Boyle) was saying during timeouts:

All shot with the 7D and 200 F2.8L II, ISO 3200 1/1000 at F2.8. The full gallery is at:

http://anorcross.smugmug.com/Sports/CU-vs-Jackson-State-11-16-2013/33506967_ng52sr

....very nice pic's. I bought 200mm 2.8 mkII for the same reason.

mailman88 wrote:

....very nice pic's. I bought 200mm 2.8 mkII for the same reason.

........that's why I bought the 135f/2 as the go between. It's range fits in quite well, slightly faster, and isn't redundant.

Hank3152 wrote:

mailman88 wrote:

....very nice pic's. I bought 200mm 2.8 mkII for the same reason.

........that's why I bought the 135f/2 as the go between. It's range fits in quite well, slightly faster, and isn't redundant.

Yes, I probably need to buy that one too! Thanks a lot! If I'd known how close I would be to the action at one end, I would probably have taken my 85 F1.8 and 1.4X extender. The 135L would be better, but the 85 1.8 and 1.4X extender is a lot cheaper for me (because I already have them).

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Hank3152 wrote:

........that's why I bought the 135f/2 as the go between. It's range fits in quite well, slightly faster, and isn't redundant.

Yes, I probably need to buy that one too! Thanks a lot! If I'd known how close I would be to the action at one end, I would probably have taken my 85 F1.8 and 1.4X extender. The 135L would be better, but the 85 1.8 and 1.4X extender is a lot cheaper for me (because I already have them).

The 135 is a great complement to the 70-200 for just those situations........btw, the 85/1.8 is not compatible with any Canon extender, only L series primes from 135 and above.
Compatibility chart

Hank3152 wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Hank3152 wrote:

........that's why I bought the 135f/2 as the go between. It's range fits in quite well, slightly faster, and isn't redundant.

Yes, I probably need to buy that one too! Thanks a lot! If I'd known how close I would be to the action at one end, I would probably have taken my 85 F1.8 and 1.4X extender. The 135L would be better, but the 85 1.8 and 1.4X extender is a lot cheaper for me (because I already have them).

The 135 is a great complement to the 70-200 for just those situations........btw, the 85 is not compatible with any Canon extender, only primes from 135 and above.

Yes, I know. My 1.4X extender is a Kenko Pro, which does work, and quite well, with the 85 F1.8.

I do have the 70-200/4 IS for the better lighting situations, but I thought I would have better luck extending the 135/2 to 189/2.8 than extending my 85/1.8 to 136/2.5 and went that way.  What TC extender do you have and do you use it on your 200/2.8 to get 280/4 often?

jitteringjr wrote:

I do have the 70-200/4 IS for the better lighting situations, but I thought I would have better luck extending the 135/2 to 189/2.8 than extending my 85/1.8 to 136/2.5 and went that way. What TC extender do you have and do you use it on your 200/2.8 to get 280/4 often?

I have the Kenko Pro 1.4X and the Canon 2XIII. I don't often use either one on the 200, but when I do, the 1.4X gives excellent results. The 2X works well enough, but I actually get better results using the 2X with the 70-200 F2.8L ISII.