scottthehat
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,290
- Name
- scott
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ok thanks, Im more than happy with my shots i get for the gear im using, and its hard to get a 95mm nd filter.
50-500mm os.
Last edited:
Telephoto zoom lens for Motorsport & Wildlife 1k budget - Your advice please
- Thread starter bdigital
- Start date
50-500mm os.
FourRingCircus
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,949
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
FWIW, I have the 100-400 IS, the 300 F4 IS (& the 400 F5.6). The 300 is almost permanently attached to my 5D3 as a 'walkabout' lens and it is superb. Unless you are a motorsports marshal, you'll never be too close to the track with that. It's also very good for wildlife and the fact that it's also a healthy macro performer just adds to its appeal. Personally, I don't like it with the 1.4x, as it almost makes you want to try for more distant subjects and the subsequent cropping / loss of IQ doesn't work for me.
By contrast, I never use the 100-400 and it is always found on my wifes 550D! It's not a bad lens at all, but it's just too much of a 'jack of all'. As has already been said, it's almost always used at full zoom and so the tendency is to try too hard with distant subjects. With the zoom set at 400, it's in the third division when compared to the 500 (yes I know the 500 isn't a fair comparison). The 400 prime is a better lens than the zoom @ 400mm, but I've only used the 400 F5.6 once since I got it (should sell it really) as it's not as workable as the 300 F4 due to the lack of IS.
Given your requirements and budget, I'd suggest the following Canon lenses in order of preference:
I can't speak for any other brands as I've never used them.:|
If you go for the 300, I'll warn you that you'll always wonder if you should have got the zoom instead. However, if you get the zoom, you won't actually notice that you should have gone for the 300!!! It's only when you have both that you'll discover the zoom will keep it's end-caps on.
By contrast, I never use the 100-400 and it is always found on my wifes 550D! It's not a bad lens at all, but it's just too much of a 'jack of all'. As has already been said, it's almost always used at full zoom and so the tendency is to try too hard with distant subjects. With the zoom set at 400, it's in the third division when compared to the 500 (yes I know the 500 isn't a fair comparison). The 400 prime is a better lens than the zoom @ 400mm, but I've only used the 400 F5.6 once since I got it (should sell it really) as it's not as workable as the 300 F4 due to the lack of IS.
Given your requirements and budget, I'd suggest the following Canon lenses in order of preference:
- 300 F4 IS
- 100-400 IS
- 400
I can't speak for any other brands as I've never used them.:|
If you go for the 300, I'll warn you that you'll always wonder if you should have got the zoom instead. However, if you get the zoom, you won't actually notice that you should have gone for the 300!!! It's only when you have both that you'll discover the zoom will keep it's end-caps on.
Thanks for the new responses - Really impressed by the knowledgable and helpful people on the forum.
I had a look through my shots from BSB at brands in July, and the majority were taken at under 300mm. There were some i took at max range 300 - but only on the outside of druids looking onto paddock, and the famous little mound at the back of the GP track where all the togs stand (stirlings i think). These are the two areas at brands that i feel would benefit from more than 300mm.
Druids inside = Around 140 - 150mm (the 300 prime would be too close here i guess)
Hawthorns = Around 140mm
Westfield = Around 170 - 190mm
If i had the 300mm prime then i wouldnt be able to use it on these corners, or am i missing something here?!
I do go to other tracks as said in the op (Thruxton and Silverstone) but Brands is my local and my most regular.
Im getting the picture here though - The 100 - 400 is a jack of all trades and therefore is specialist at nothing but decent at everything. This is quite a tough decision for me because i wont be buying more than one lens, at least not for quite a while!
I had a look through my shots from BSB at brands in July, and the majority were taken at under 300mm. There were some i took at max range 300 - but only on the outside of druids looking onto paddock, and the famous little mound at the back of the GP track where all the togs stand (stirlings i think). These are the two areas at brands that i feel would benefit from more than 300mm.
Druids inside = Around 140 - 150mm (the 300 prime would be too close here i guess)
Hawthorns = Around 140mm
Westfield = Around 170 - 190mm
If i had the 300mm prime then i wouldnt be able to use it on these corners, or am i missing something here?!
I do go to other tracks as said in the op (Thruxton and Silverstone) but Brands is my local and my most regular.
Im getting the picture here though - The 100 - 400 is a jack of all trades and therefore is specialist at nothing but decent at everything. This is quite a tough decision for me because i wont be buying more than one lens, at least not for quite a while!
desantnik
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,848
- Name
- Vlad
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well my suggestion would be to give the hundred four hundred a try...borrow or loan or buy one second hand...if you don't like it, you have lost little.
Long primes are good but you have to change your mindset to get the most...and it's not easy, I remember that experience!
Long primes are good but you have to change your mindset to get the most...and it's not easy, I remember that experience!
Thank you for taking the time to help (that goes for everyone!)
Can i ask a hopefully silly question. Will the 100 - 400 be a marked improvement in quality vs my low end tamron 70-300? Because thats important to me.
desantnik
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,848
- Name
- Vlad
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes, it should be considerably better in pretty much every way.
My motorsport Canon "long" (ie longer than 200mm) lens rankings in terms of performance are:
#1 Canon 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 or 500 f4 or 600 f4 (these are the best, no question!)
#2 Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS (the new one, really pretty good)
#3 Canon 300 f4 IS
#4 Canon 100-400
#5 Sigma 100-300 f4
#6 Canon L 70-300
#7 Canon 70-300 IS (best bang per buck out there, but only just making this list to be honest - no TC's and not tooo clever at 300mm)
Those are (mainly) the lenses you see people who work as media togs use. We've all used other stuff that doesn't cut it and believe me most have tried everything to find the sweet spot. Other could probably muse the order I have ranked some of them in, but anything off that list should give you a reasonable to excellent chance of nailing the shot.
Happy to share this hard earnt info, it shouldn't be a secret.
My motorsport Canon "long" (ie longer than 200mm) lens rankings in terms of performance are:
#1 Canon 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 or 500 f4 or 600 f4 (these are the best, no question!)
#2 Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS (the new one, really pretty good)
#3 Canon 300 f4 IS
#4 Canon 100-400
#5 Sigma 100-300 f4
#6 Canon L 70-300
#7 Canon 70-300 IS (best bang per buck out there, but only just making this list to be honest - no TC's and not tooo clever at 300mm)
Those are (mainly) the lenses you see people who work as media togs use. We've all used other stuff that doesn't cut it and believe me most have tried everything to find the sweet spot. Other could probably muse the order I have ranked some of them in, but anything off that list should give you a reasonable to excellent chance of nailing the shot.
Happy to share this hard earnt info, it shouldn't be a secret.
pete.rush
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
desantnik have you changed your mind about the sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS v 300mm f4. I remember one of your post where you weren't impressed with the lens colour contrast when you used that lens.
pete.rush
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
I was luck to get a mint condition 300mm f2.8 a couple of years back and just love it, great lens and easily hand holdable and works well with the MKII TC's, even the 1.4x and 2x TC stacked in the right conditions.
300mm F2.8 (MKI) + 1.4x and 2x TC (MKII) stacked
Canon 300mm f2.8 + 2x TC (MKII)
Of course with everything, you need the right conditions to get the best results As desantnik said
300mm F2.8 (MKI) + 1.4x and 2x TC (MKII) stacked
Canon 300mm f2.8 + 2x TC (MKII)
Of course with everything, you need the right conditions to get the best results As desantnik said
footman
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,914
- Name
- Laurence
- Edit My Images
- No
I frequently use a 300 f4 IS with a Kenko 1.4x TC and the results are excellent. One point I would raise is that it would be useful to have a body that's capable of micro-adjustment. All of my prime lenses have required minimal if any MA on my 1D body but putting the TC on the prime requires much more MA.
My 300 + 1.4 requires an MA of +7 and the end result is noticeable.
My 300 + 1.4 requires an MA of +7 and the end result is noticeable.
seriousrikk
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,881
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have a question here... How much are you cropping your images.
When I shot sports with a 100-400mm zoom I found I was giving my subject more room and the cropping afterwards.
Once I got the 300 F4 IS I didn't have that luxury... however I also found I got better at framing the subject properly.
philthejuggler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,086
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I happened to get free tickets to Rockingham for yesterday, two days after getting a 70-300L
I was very impressed with it on my 7D and got some shots I was pleased with. 300mm on a crop was as much reach as I needed.
Phil
I was very impressed with it on my 7D and got some shots I was pleased with. 300mm on a crop was as much reach as I needed.
Phil
Had a good day at Brands Hatch today, I mainly stuck with a cheapy 55-250mm Canon IS lens (nothing special).
I tried my best to see what others were using, and i got talking to a few people and one kind chap even let me have a go on his 400mm prime L lens. He recommended i give the 100-400 L a go for its flexibility at a track like brands.
My shots were not very good
But im hoping that around December when i can afford a new lens that will all change 
Here are some shots of the top 3. Plenty of room for improvement, more than happy for constructive critisim.
Tommy Hill by bdigital101, on Flickr
Josh Brookes by bdigital101, on Flickr
Shakey by bdigital101, on Flickr
I tried my best to see what others were using, and i got talking to a few people and one kind chap even let me have a go on his 400mm prime L lens. He recommended i give the 100-400 L a go for its flexibility at a track like brands.
My shots were not very good
But im hoping that around December when i can afford a new lens that will all change Here are some shots of the top 3. Plenty of room for improvement, more than happy for constructive critisim.
Tommy Hill by bdigital101, on Flickr
Josh Brookes by bdigital101, on Flickr
Shakey by bdigital101, on Flickr
Last edited:
I am glad I found this thread as I had become frustrated of going round and round the 'which lens to choose' routine which is usually compromised by either not having enough money to buy what you really desire (but might not need) against not quite knowing the distance between camera and subject for which the lens will be needed most. First question to 'bdigital' though, if still on the net, which lens did you go for? My money would have been on your choice being the 100-400?
I am going through the same quandary with the same amount of money but I could push it a bit further. I currently have a a Canon 7D with a 70-200mm F4 IS etc and I use a 1.4 extender at the expense of a stop. I use this combination as a spectator at motorsports events: BSB, Thundersport and MX and the like. For some circuits such as Cadwell this is fine but at others it is underpowered yet the reach of the combination is 448mm. When I get it right my shots are pretty good, sometimes very good, but the wastage hints at poor technique or expecting too much of the focusing system which is trying to find definition in a very short space of time. So my mind turned to looking for a bit more reach and putting the 70-200 on my 30D (I know it's almost prehistoric now but still works well).
The lens that leapt out first was the Canon 400mm (640mm )which takes the extender but at the expense of the autofocus and hand-holding at that range as no IS; my eyesight isn't what it was so I went off the idea but it fits the price and quality. I then thought the 'white' 70-300 F4/F5.6' which has good reviews but that appears not to take, or be compatible with, the extenders (?); also a lens mount is not included - so a great all-round lens but not top of the leader board for me. The 100-400 is also popular and I know a few photographers that use them (again no mount included) but I am not sure about the bellows at MX events and the advice from you all that you will spend your time at the 400-end rings true. I suppose a makeshift or cover could sort that out. So I came down to the Canon 300mm F4 (480mm with camera crop) which fits the bill financially along with the quality - it is much lighter as well and I have also looked at the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 (better focussing opprortunities for sure but another £1K or so) but that weighs in at 3Kg plus, which is a lot to carry about for a day, perhaps with the second camera and lens, waterproofs and a half-eaten bacon buttie! I know some of you will probably be saying: 'what do you want, mate, the shot or a compromise?' The best compromise I suppose.
So much as this thread suggested, I think the 300mm will be the one and I need to check one out, but I hope my thoughts might help build on those I have have already found so helpful here. The big question though is: if we, as spectators all have to stand at the same corners with the same cameras and lenses then getting 'different' shots is very difficult. I used to ride MX and enduro (a very long time ago) and love the day out whether I get good shots or not, but access to events is very important as well when thinking about lens choice. I no longer go to some British MX Championship rounds as so much of the course is roped off to the public (I can understand why given the costs of events these days) that the photo opportunities from the crowd line don't justify the effort and cost, from my point-of-view. Cadders Hill at Lyng in Norfolk is an exception though, as is Hawkstone Park - I have ridden them both and still admire how quick the riders go round.
Again, thanks for all the contributions above which have helped my thinking greatly. By the way, for anyone who has stayed with this message and knows Brands Hatch (I haven't been before) I hope to go in August to see the F3 meeting. Will my current set up 70-200 and extender be man enough for that circuit?
All the best
I am going through the same quandary with the same amount of money but I could push it a bit further. I currently have a a Canon 7D with a 70-200mm F4 IS etc and I use a 1.4 extender at the expense of a stop. I use this combination as a spectator at motorsports events: BSB, Thundersport and MX and the like. For some circuits such as Cadwell this is fine but at others it is underpowered yet the reach of the combination is 448mm. When I get it right my shots are pretty good, sometimes very good, but the wastage hints at poor technique or expecting too much of the focusing system which is trying to find definition in a very short space of time. So my mind turned to looking for a bit more reach and putting the 70-200 on my 30D (I know it's almost prehistoric now but still works well).
The lens that leapt out first was the Canon 400mm (640mm )which takes the extender but at the expense of the autofocus and hand-holding at that range as no IS; my eyesight isn't what it was so I went off the idea but it fits the price and quality. I then thought the 'white' 70-300 F4/F5.6' which has good reviews but that appears not to take, or be compatible with, the extenders (?); also a lens mount is not included - so a great all-round lens but not top of the leader board for me. The 100-400 is also popular and I know a few photographers that use them (again no mount included) but I am not sure about the bellows at MX events and the advice from you all that you will spend your time at the 400-end rings true. I suppose a makeshift or cover could sort that out. So I came down to the Canon 300mm F4 (480mm with camera crop) which fits the bill financially along with the quality - it is much lighter as well and I have also looked at the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 (better focussing opprortunities for sure but another £1K or so) but that weighs in at 3Kg plus, which is a lot to carry about for a day, perhaps with the second camera and lens, waterproofs and a half-eaten bacon buttie! I know some of you will probably be saying: 'what do you want, mate, the shot or a compromise?' The best compromise I suppose.
So much as this thread suggested, I think the 300mm will be the one and I need to check one out, but I hope my thoughts might help build on those I have have already found so helpful here. The big question though is: if we, as spectators all have to stand at the same corners with the same cameras and lenses then getting 'different' shots is very difficult. I used to ride MX and enduro (a very long time ago) and love the day out whether I get good shots or not, but access to events is very important as well when thinking about lens choice. I no longer go to some British MX Championship rounds as so much of the course is roped off to the public (I can understand why given the costs of events these days) that the photo opportunities from the crowd line don't justify the effort and cost, from my point-of-view. Cadders Hill at Lyng in Norfolk is an exception though, as is Hawkstone Park - I have ridden them both and still admire how quick the riders go round.
Again, thanks for all the contributions above which have helped my thinking greatly. By the way, for anyone who has stayed with this message and knows Brands Hatch (I haven't been before) I hope to go in August to see the F3 meeting. Will my current set up 70-200 and extender be man enough for that circuit?
All the best