1-4 of 4 Answers
It all depends on what you want to capture at the games. If you're just interested in game action and faces I'd stick with your 70-200 or maybe even buy a longer lens or a 1.4x teleconverter. I photographed college football for the newspapers and the Associated Press for a few years, mostly with a 400mm f2.8 lens, but always carried a wide angle lens on a second camera hung over my shoulder. A fixed focal length wide angle (faster for darker sidelines during late games) or a wide angle zoom (more flexible) is real handy when the action comes to the sidelines or for telling a story with something other than game action. Your 70-200 will still be best for most shots, including faces. When you get close to a face with a wide angle you've invaded the subject's space, likely disrupting candid shooting, and the distortion becomes unflattering.
Sorry, there was a problem. Please try again later.A wide angle lens is recommended for landscape photography. For a youth football game you need a telephoto. Your 70-200 is a telephoto lens. To get closer facial expressions you need to consider how close you can get to the field too. 200mm is not bad but anything over 300mm is better. If you can afford a prime 300mm or 400mm with a low F by all means go for. Other wise you can get good results with a 70-300mm
Sorry, there was a problem. Please try again later.I use the 70-300 to take photos of my son playing basketball and soccer. You can get 50% closer than with your 70-200.
Sorry, there was a problem. Please try again later.The girl at BestBuy said this would be good for action shots like at games but I'm not sure if your in the seats it should be wide angled enough but I also have a wide angle lens that I had purchased
Sorry, there was a problem. Please try again later.
