EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM or EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM

[jasonsim]

That's a pretty big field (for soccer) but I think the 400mm f/2.8L II is going to be your best option.  I think you might find 600mm too long.  You probably want to have a second body with a 70-200mm attached also.   

The choice, 400mm or 600mm, depends on where you will be in relation to the athletes.  If on the side lines, I think 400mm is enough.  You can crop some and, if you have one, use a 1.4x extender on the 400mm.  That will give you 560mm f/4.  Not shabby and on a 1Dx should still AF very fast. 

Kind regards,
Jason Simmons 

[expatinasia]

Thank you everyone.

I have decided to go with the 400 ii f/2.8L, and as someone mentioned I could always stick my 1.4x iii on that if I do need the extra reach.

I must say I am very excited about finally trying one of the big whites. The 70-200 f/2.8 ii is a great lens, but I have worked next to those big lenses for years, and have seen the outstanding results they produce when the guys are working on the images post-match.

The IS Mode 3 is also something I am really looking forward to experiencing.

I am sure it will be hard to give back once I am done, but then I just have to look at the price tag to realise it just is not a viable option right now. Time to start saving me thinks. ;-)

[TexPhoto]

Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous. 

[expatinasia]

Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.

[Menace]

Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.

+1

Monopod is your only option really - a nice carbon fibre one will be light and strong.

[dolina]

GM5561T if you want the most compact and light weight monopod that has the highest load capacity.

Cool!  I have the 1.4X III and have to say my 400 seems as sharp with it as it does without.

Are you going to use a monopod or tripod?  For sideline sports like football you generally can't use a tripod.  Players could be injured by it.  A monopod is far less dangerous.

I would only use a monopod for sports. A tripod is fine for portraits or landscapes, where your subjects do not move, but for sports - when space is also often limited due to the number of other media - then a monopod is the only option.

+1

Monopod is your only option really - a nice carbon fibre one will be light and strong.

[expatinasia]

GM5561T if you want the most compact and light weight monopod that has the highest load capacity.

Thanks. I already have a monopod that can hold up to 15kgs so won't be buying a new one.

This was more about the lens choice for renting, and I am glad I asked as I had a feeling I should have gone for the 400 2.8 II which is what most here have confirmed.