Don't want to make a rookie mistake

[IIIHobbs]

I disagree with the recommendation for the 135 f/2 - excellent lens, but on a crop it will be a bit long on occasion and it would burn up your entire budget.  Instead ...

- Purchase the EF 85 f/1.8 ($359 today at B&H) - this will cover most of your fast lens indoor needs, and has excellent focus, and is very sharp.  The AF will keep up with your sports and give you a fast lens for low light events like choir concerts where you might need the range.
- Purchase the EF 70-200 f/4L (non IS) $629 today at B&H.  For outdoor sports, wildlife, etc.  You don't need IS for sports because your shutter speed will need to be approx 1/500 and at that point IS isn't going to add value.  This is one of the best value L lenses and one of the sharpest 70-200 lenses.

This is sound advice based on your budget, experience and camera body.

The 85mm on a Crop Sensor body works very well for Basketball, Volleyball, etc. On a Full Frame Camera I have found the 135 f2 the better choice.

The 70-200 f4L is a very good lens and will provide much improved clarity and sharpness and speed over the 55-250 (especially at the long end).

From the DigitalPicture.com: My recommendation is to get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM Lens over the 55-250. I think you will appreciate the better image quality as well as the high end physical features - the extra cost is worth it in my opinion. The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens is also a better lens, but less definitively so. Though I don't think the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens is great in terms of image quality and features, we can't lose sight of the fact that it is very inexpensive IS tele-zoom Lens. There is a niche for this model. A casual shooter who is happy with their Canon EF-S 18-55mm II or 18-55 IS Lens and needs a tele-zoom for infrequent use could be happy with this lens.

[dhofmann]

100L would be the way to go considering his budget

The 135mm f/2L will give him more pixels on the subject than the 100mm f/2L at the same aperture, so it depends on which focal length he finds more useful.

The 70-200 f4L is a very good lens and will provide much improved clarity and sharpness and speed over the 55-250 (especially at the long end).

The 70-200mm f/4L IS is even better, even if you don't use image stabilization.

[bycostello]

for hilidays i'd never get a big lens, as you get tired both physically and figuratively of carrying it around

[Kcray85]

Thank you everyone for your replies.  i will let you know what i end up doing.

[crasher8]

If you like medium tele primes, I might suggest thinking about a refurbished 100 2.8 Macro. First off it's a great macro lens, secondly it's a fantastic portrait lens and it's a nice middle focal length (what's your 70-200 sweet spot?). Black lens, not too heavy and fast enough for most lighting situations. It also will give you the cash to buy a faster and wider prime, something that you're missing. If not than I also suggest the non IS 70-200 f/4 and get a refurb from Canon USA for under 600.

[EOBeav]

For what it's worth... if F4 isn't enough to stop action, F2.8 likely wont either,

Huh? Then why do lens companies spend the extra R&D money developing lenses an entire stop faster?

OP: For $1200, you should be able to get the 135 f/2 L as well as a 50mm f/1.4.  Those two lenses would go a long ways in shooting the events you described.

[EOBeav]

- Sell your 55-250, and purchase the EF 70-200 f/4L (non IS) $629 today at B&H.  For outdoor sports, wildlife, etc.  You don't need IS for sports because your shutter speed will need to be approx 1/500 and at that point IS isn't going to add value.  This is one of the best value L lenses and one of the sharpest 70-200 lenses.

No. Although the 70-200 f/4 L (non-IS) is really good (I have one), it's not ideal for indoor sports.  And more so if you're shooting with a Rebel. Do those still max out at ISO 1600? If so, you're not going to get near enough shutter speed in the average gym. Choir concerts will be even worse.

I'm still saying that a 135mm f/2 L is your best bet for those things, especially if you don't have the coin for a 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

[Kcray85]

- Sell your 55-250, and purchase the EF 70-200 f/4L (non IS) $629 today at B&H.  For outdoor sports, wildlife, etc.  You don't need IS for sports because your shutter speed will need to be approx 1/500 and at that point IS isn't going to add value.  This is one of the best value L lenses and one of the sharpest 70-200 lenses.

No. Although the 70-200 f/4 L (non-IS) is really good (I have one), it's not ideal for indoor sports.  And more so if you're shooting with a Rebel. Do those still max out at ISO 1600? If so, you're not going to get near enough shutter speed in the average gym. Choir concerts will be even worse.

I'm still saying that a 135mm f/2 L is your best bet for those things, especially if you don't have the coin for a 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

The t4i shoots up to 6400 iso. It appears with a side job I just landed this morning, the 70-200 2.8 non IS will be in reach.

[neuroanatomist]

The t4i shoots up to 6400 iso. It appears with a side job I just landed this morning, the 70-200 2.8 non IS will be in reach.

Actually, it goes up to ISO 12800, with ISO 25600 available as an expanded setting (H).  But whether ISO 6400 is actually usable, much less ISO 12800 or higher, is another matter.  Just because the setting is available, doesn't mean you should use it - the 1D X has ISO 204800 available, but it's not even remotely usable. 

Reportedly, the T4i actually a little noisier than the predecessor sensor (the one in the 7D, 60D, T2i, T3i).  That's probably artificial due to some tuning by Canon, since it's sharper than the predecessor sensor, too (noise can be traded for sharpness, and vice versa).  Personally, I find ISO 3200 on the 7D to be usable, but only just, and I really prefer to keep the ISO around 800.  But, noise tolerance is subjective, so if you're happy with ISO 6400 on the T4i, great!

[EOBeav]

The t4i shoots up to 6400 iso. It appears with a side job I just landed this morning, the 70-200 2.8 non IS will be in reach.

Got it. The last Rebel I shot with was an XSi (350D).  Not a bad sensor at all, but that max ISO 1600 could be really limiting at times.

[robbymack]

Since you seem to be primarily interested in the long end and you want to do some low light before you run out and buy the 70-200 2.8 take a hard look at the 2.8 is ii version. Rent them both for a weekend and see which you like better. Yes the latter is more expensive, but it's fantastic, check the used prices and see if it fits the budget. They are both beasts so you may not like the weight if so both f4 versions of that lens are very, very good. In fact of the 4 models the non IS 2.8 would probably be a distant 4th in my mind. Seems silly to have all that weight/price and still not get IS.

[Kcray85]

The t4i shoots up to 6400 iso. It appears with a side job I just landed this morning, the 70-200 2.8 non IS will be in reach.

Actually, it goes up to ISO 12800, with ISO 25600 available as an expanded setting (H).  But whether ISO 6400 is actually usable, much less ISO 12800 or higher, is another matter.  Just because the setting is available, doesn't mean you should use it - the 1D X has ISO 204800 available, but it's not even remotely usable. 

Reportedly, the T4i actually a little noisier than the predecessor sensor (the one in the 7D, 60D, T2i, T3i).  That's probably artificial due to some tuning by Canon, since it's sharper than the predecessor sensor, too (noise can be traded for sharpness, and vice versa).  Personally, I find ISO 3200 on the 7D to be usable, but only just, and I really prefer to keep the ISO around 800.  But, noise tolerance is subjective, so if you're happy with ISO 6400 on the T4i, great!

You are correct.  I was not at home to double check before i answered that so i went with a safe answer.

[papa-razzi]

- Sell your 55-250, and purchase the EF 70-200 f/4L (non IS) $629 today at B&H.  For outdoor sports, wildlife, etc.  You don't need IS for sports because your shutter speed will need to be approx 1/500 and at that point IS isn't going to add value.  This is one of the best value L lenses and one of the sharpest 70-200 lenses.

No. Although the 70-200 f/4 L (non-IS) is really good (I have one), it's not ideal for indoor sports.  And more so if you're shooting with a Rebel. Do those still max out at ISO 1600? If so, you're not going to get near enough shutter speed in the average gym. Choir concerts will be even worse.


I'm still saying that a 135mm f/2 L is your best bet for those things, especially if you don't have the coin for a 70-200 f/2.8 L non-IS.

The full recommendation was the 85 f/1.8 for INDOOR, and 70-200 f/4 L for OUTDOOR.
I completely agree f/4 isn't going to cut it in a highschool gym.

[AudioGlenn]

the rookie mistake is buying the wrong gear and finding out it won't really work for what you needed it for.  I'd consider saving up a little longer for the 70-200 2.8 IS II. 

[picturesbyme]

EF200mm 2.8L II
often overlooked.. yet an awesome lens...