bobbygee

Hello to all
I need to know about a Canon lens for sports photography. It's a Canon EOS T7 body and I know a 70-200mm or 200-400mm Canon lens would be ideal. Indoor wrestling, swimming and girls softball. The issue is I am a Nikon shooter since 1971 and really don't know much about Canons. A family member is looking at a used Canon T7 and thinks an 18-55mm lens will suffice (I see a slow motion train wreck in her future lol). Also there are budget considerations. Looking for advice.
Thanks

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

What is the budget? For indoor sports such as wrestling, swimming, etc. a 70-200 f2.8L is THE lens. You can pick up a MKI IS in the $7-800 range, and a MK II for twice that. The MKII is a better lens, but the MKI is no slouch, and the question for you is it 2x the $ better. I use a MKI for indoor sports, and it’s plenty sharp.

bobbygee

Thanks for the response. I'm trying to stop her from buying a 55-200 or 70-300 f/4-5.6 type lens, especially for indoor. I use the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 and wanted to hear from some Canon folks.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

If your indoor gyms are like the HS gyms I shoot in, something that slow is going to be a mistake. Basketball is one thing, but wrestling and swimming meets often have the lights so low you’re maxed on ISO. I typically shoot at f2.8 1/250-1/500 on auto ISO and my ISOs range from 6400-10,000. Imagine what they’d be at 2 stops slower at f5.6. Indoor sports at the HS (and sometimes collegiate) level is one of those corner cases that just requires fast glass if you’re going to succeed.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Hopefully, yes, you can stop this poor choice of lenses for indoor work. The 55-200 and 70-300 are fine general purpose lenses, but not for indoor lighting.

A lens with an f/2.8 max aperture is workable for indoor, but we all know HS indoor sports will typically occur under less than prime-time lighting. A few ideas:

The Canon EF-mount Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 zoom, for a price savings. The current model is: Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD

The Canon 70-200 f/2.8L versions. I like the IS support, where there are vI, v II and vIII options, two used and the v III current, each more expensive.

Canon primes might be a better option, such as the EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 100mm f/2, EF 135mm f/2L or EF 200mm f/2.8L. The first three options pair well with the cropped sensor EOS T7, each getting 'closer', where maybe even too close if the photographer can get close in a smaller gym setting. The zooms might be more practical, even if their max aperture is 1-stop slower in the low-light. The Canon f/2.8L lens options offer the ability to use a teleconverter (extender) even out to an effective 400mm on the EOS T7, so these lens options work both indoors and outdoors for at-a-distance shooting.

One very modest price idea is the EF 50mm f/1.8, about $125 for the current "stm" version. That's about an effective 80mm on a Canon crop and might be useful from close-to-action work indoors, where a larger investment and the optimal focal length can be determined from images captured at the 80mm field of view. The 50mm prime would pair well with the useful 18-55, where the lenses can be changed to the lighting situation.

To cutback some on the sticker shock, look to the used market for available lenses.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

When I photographed collegiate sports I carried the 70-200 2.8 on one camera body and the 24-70 2.8 on another. Covered everything I needed.

bobbygee

I’ve worked hs and D3 college basketball and the lighting is very different at each gym. Anywhere from 1600 to 10000 iso at 2.8! I will use your response to help sway the new Canon owner to invest in better glass. Thanks

Toby

I agree Jim. I shoot a ton of HS wrestling every year. I Canon 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2,8 are about the best lenses you can buy in my opinion. Gyms are frequently dark and some even have overhead spot lights which the crowd and wrestlers love but photographers hate. If wrestlers are any where other than the direct center you have a problem. If you are close to the action the 28-70 is best unless you want part of the bodies cut off. Shots can be enlarged to good quality from the 24mm.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

I agree Jim.

bobbygee

Thanks for all of your comments. They will become the points I make in my argument for faster and longer glass!

tshift Loc: Overland Park, KS.

Jim is right. The two would be ideal, but if only one the 80-200mm f/2.8 is the one for indoors. Thanks BE SAFE!!

Tom