Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM (I)

Status
Not open for further replies.
neuroanatomist said:
Happy viking said:
Is there any sports photographers out there who can ansver if the 300 will be sufficiant to shoot soccer?

I currently use 5D MK III and also have a 7D.

Yes, it will be sufficient. More than sufficient, actually.

I know its a good pice of glass. I currently use 70-200 and feel i dont get close enough. And wonder if i should pull the trigger on a 300 or wait until i can find a 400 is i can afford.
 
Upvote 0
A 400 II would be great; the 400 MkI is a big, heavy beast (12.5 lbs) that cannot really be handheld. IMO, the 300 is a better choice, especially given that you're shooting with 18-22 MP and can probably afford to crop a bit if needed.
 
Upvote 0
An acquaintance of mine is heavily into Rugby photography (I live is Wales we don't mention the game that uses round balls). He uses a 1D4 and a Canon 300mm F2.8 L IS Mk1 (I have the same combination for wildlife), he reckons the 300 is about as good as it gets. Though the 400 F2.8 gives more range he takes the vast majority of his shots with the 300 as it is much more maneuverable. He also has a Canon 70 -200 F2.8 for closer shots - but rarely gets the chance to use it as the action is frequently too fast to change to the shorter lens. He tells me that, if you are on the touch line, then the 300 F2.8 is the way to go - the newspapers seem to agree with him - they like/publish a lot of his work.
 
Upvote 0
I use it for Soccer and sometimes add the 1.4xiii, especially with the 5D3 when I need reach further down field. As neuro pointed out, the next bump up from a 300 is a 400 and it's way too heavy. I carry the 300 all day and while heavier than the 70-200II its not so much so that I would leave behind on a shoot. I sometimes hook the lens strap up to my backback (StreetWalkerPro) and that takes further load off the neck.

BTW the StreeWalkerPro is an excellent backpack case for the 300 2.8L and full pro body. You cant store with the hood extended but that only takes a second to reverse and there is still room left for extenders AND a 2nd body.

BTW the bokeh with the 300 is unmatched and will make your subjects pop
 
Upvote 0
I haven't shot soccer, but I do shoot lacrosse which is played on a similar sized field. If you're shooting from the sidelines, you may find that the 400 is too much lens, unless you just like to get head and shoulder shots. From the end line, 400 would be good for the far end of the field, but would be useless when the action comes down to your end. It helps to have two bodies, one with the 300 and the other with the 70-200 f2.8. I keep the 300 on a monopod, and just hold it in the crook of my left arm when the action gets close and I need to use the 70-200. Works well with the OpTech double strap and the Spider Holster kit.
 
Upvote 0
Happy viking said:
neuroanatomist said:
Happy viking said:
Is there any sports photographers out there who can ansver if the 300 will be sufficiant to shoot soccer?

I currently use 5D MK III and also have a 7D.

Yes, it will be sufficient. More than sufficient, actually.

I know its a good pice of glass. I currently use 70-200 and feel i dont get close enough. And wonder if i should pull the trigger on a 300 or wait until i can find a 400 is i can afford.

I like to shoot football (american with the oblong ball) and I am afforded great leeway where I can stand. I shoot along the sidelines and towards the endzone. I use a 100mm f/2.8L and I'm quite fond of the results. Though I will admit when the subject is further away, the increased depth of field does take away from the photo. But I get around 1/8000 of a second shots and many are impressive.
 
Upvote 0
300 on either works. Just understand that you're shooting everything on your half of the pitch. Reaching over the halfway like means you're getting big groups or cropping. Keep a 1.4x for the 5d3 handy if you're not able to move about the pitch freely.

I'm saving my pennies for a 300/2.8 IS mk1.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.