Active Sports - 135 or 70-200 2.8 II?

[neuroanatomist]

Anyone shooting sports events, soccer (indoor/outdoor), basketball, etc with either of these?  Looking for FF recommendations, thanks!

I don't think you can go wrong with either (I have both, both are excellent), but I'd tend to prefer the zoom for the flexibility. 

[Hyndford]

This is an interesting thread for me as I too was considering the 135 for indoor sports, but on my crop body.

I'll be a bit back in the crowd rather than on the touchline so get the benefit of the crop 'zoom'.

For outdoors, I prefer the 70-300 for reach over speed, again on a crop from the cheap seats.

[adebrophy]

Has anyone used the 135 with a teleconverter? How does that work out for adding reach? Specifically, could this a better option than using a 200mm (or 70-200 zoom, but assuming the zoom isn't that vital) - in terms of weight, cost, IQ? Or are there too many compromises that mean you lose the sharpness and speed and gain nothing over the several great 200mm options. I'm tempted by the lens anyhow but would love to know whether a T/C could make this purchase even more flexible.

[neuroanatomist]

Has anyone used the 135 with a teleconverter? How does that work out for adding reach? I'm tempted by the lens anyhow but would love to know what the best options are for adding a bit of reach using it. Thanks!

It holds up well optically to the 1.4x TC, giving a 189mm f/2.8 lens with good IQ; the 2x has a noticeable negative impact on IQ.  For action sports use, keep in mind that a 1.4x TC slows down AF speed by 50%, and a 2x TC slows AF by 75% - I'd recommend a longer lens rather than adding a TC to the 135L.

[adebrophy]

Brilliant - thanks for that Neuroanatomist. Spot on advice!