Canon R6 II R6ii with 100-500 for sports

[AndrewWaters]

Hi All,

First time poster here so be nice

I recently bought an R6 Mark ii with 24-105 f4 and so far it has been great!

I am looking to purchase my next lease - primarily I am shooting landscapes, my kids and kids sports - I have been looking at the idea of purchasing a RF 100-500 and just need a little bit more to push myself across the line

Would some users have some photos from the sideline both at 100-500 I really want to ensure reach is ideal - mind you I think I am just being a pain.

Additionally your experience and feedback would be awesome

 

[hedleyw]

Thanks all for the feedback and help.

I am still on the edge of the 100-500 as I will be shooting outdoors and not so much inside - if any.

I have got a mates EF 70-200 f2.8 which I will test out for the week and make a decision next week.

If you’re thinking about either of the RF 70-200 lenses, bear in mind that neither are compatible with teleconverters. From that point of view an adapted EF would be a better choice. I have the 70-200 f2.8 and it is a superb lens for sport but I take 90% of my field hockey photos with the EF 400mm f2.8 mk iii. I have the RF 100-500 but don’t use it for sport, apart from the high ISO required at fast shutter speeds I prefer a shallow depth of field for sport photography.

 

[David Eaton]

Late to the discussion, but I have the 100-500 and shoot sports, for both local high schools and Murray State University. The 100-500, as I’m sure you know, is a great lens if there’s light. You’re at f/7.1 not far beyond the 400mm mark, but, the R6ii will handle high ISO values well. I have used the lens to shoot marching band shows at both Kroger Field at the University of Kentucky and Lucas Oil Stadium in Indy with good success.

The pros would be that the reach of the lens is nice for outdoor field sports. If I’m feeling lazy and only want to take one camera with me, I’ll happily use it, and have for both Murray State football and soccer. The cons, you need a lot of light. I shot some high school soccer camps this week and had to wind my shutter down to about 1/800 or 1/1,000 as we reached the 7pm hour and the sun started moving behind some buildings.

I’ve attached a couple of photos from the soccer camp, and the Hoptown Hoppers baseball game from a couple of weeks ago.







View attachment 18089

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 223.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/4000 sec
• ISO 3200

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/4.5
• 1/4000 sec
• ISO 1600

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 223.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/3200 sec
• ISO 8000

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 472.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 1250

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 145.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 2500

• Canon EOS R3
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 100.0 mm
• ƒ/4.5
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 125

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

Late to the discussion, but I have the 100-500 and shoot sports, for both local high schools and Murray State University. The 100-500, as I’m sure you know, is a great lens if there’s light. You’re at f/7.1 not far beyond the 400mm mark, but, the R6ii will handle high ISO values well. I have used the lens to shoot marching band shows at both Kroger Field at the University of Kentucky and Lucas Oil Stadium in Indy with good success.

The pros would be that the reach of the lens is nice for outdoor field sports. If I’m feeling lazy and only want to take one camera with me, I’ll happily use it, and have for both Murray State football and soccer. The cons, you need a lot of light. I shot some high school soccer camps this week and had to wind my shutter down to about 1/800 or 1/1,000 as we reached the 7pm hour and the sun started moving behind some buildings.

I’ve attached a couple of photos from the soccer camp, and the Hoptown Hoppers baseball game from a couple of weeks ago.

David, I’m getting into sports shooting, might become my main focus, remains to be seen. I’ve only had the R6M2 for a few days, but most of my fooling around with it has been in low light. I bought the 24-105 STM version and was surprised how well the camera handles the higher ISO and narrower apertures (7.1 @ 105).

When I bought the camera I picked up an EF adapter because that glass used is so much more affordable. I thought I’d really need to get a 70-200 F2.8, but I’m starting to wonder if the F4.0 version and an extra grand in my pocket is better. In your experience is the R6M2 able to use the F4 70-200 at outdoor events like HS football where lighting may not be up to college or professional standards? After my short experiences with the camera I’m confident I could shoot basketball and hockey with the F4.

Thanks.

 

[David Eaton]

I would always go with a 2.8 lens for sports if it is an option, because you’re not just concerned about the noise level in the image, you want the faster shutter speed. Going from an f4 lens to an f/2.8 gives you an extra stop of light, which, if I understand all the relationships correctly (and I may not!) allows you to double your shutter speed. So, and image that looks good at 1/500 at f4 can be shot at 1/1,000 at 2.8. That extra shutter speed is huge and is worth the extra money.

And what I’ve found is that a lot of college fields don’t really have great light, either. The image below is from a Murray State soccer game at Southern Illinois University. These are both Division 1 schools in the Missouri Valley Conference. I did run it through Denoise AI, but you can see that I’m at 1/1,000 and ISO 16,000. If I had to shoot at f/4 I think I’d have a much less pleasing image.

Hockey would be a lot easier because the ice certainly helps with the lighting. Basketball is tougher because of the different paint scheme on the gym floors. And, I’ll wind HS boys basketball down to 1/640 sometimes, but you start to get some unpleasant motion blur depending on the shot...the layup below doesn’t look too bad, it’s also been through Denoise.

I’ve had great success with EF glass and an adapter, and used EF lenses are much more affordable and work well on the R6. That said, for sports, I’d get the fastest glass I could, especially if lights are involved.

• Canon EOS R6
• RF400mm F2.8 L IS USM
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/2.8
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 16000