Lens to buy

[toby_ta]

I'm going into sport photography, I only have a thousand dolllars to spare on a lens, what Lens can i buy? I use a Canon 7D

[ScottyP]

You could get a 70-200 f/4 L. It is a big white and it is sharp and will do great for sports on a 7d. It is about $709.00.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_USM.html?sid=cpw-17...

[cicopo]

As above unless you need more reach and if so consider the 100-400 L IS or 70-300 L IS but to stay within your budget you may need to go the used route.

[amfoto1]

What lenses do you have now? What kind of sports photography? It's hard to recommend anything without more info.

I shoot sports a lot  with a pair of 7Ds and my most frequently used lenses for the purpose are 70-200 and 300mm.

I use IS versions of both 70-200/4 and f2.8. With 300mm I also use both f4 and f2.8 variants, with and without 1.4X and 2X teleconverters.

My 300/4 IS and 70-200/4 IS both were within your budget or less, assuming we're talking US $. I bought both of them used. New they would have been over your budget.  

Other lenses I use for sports less frequently to infrequently (Canon unless otherwise noted): EF-S 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24, EF 20/2.8, 28/1.8, 28-135, 24-70/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2  and 500/4.

Some folks like to use 70-300s for sports. If looking at those, I'd recommend only the USM versions in order for focus to be quick enough for sports (70-300 USM IS, 70-300 DO USM IS, 70-300L IS USM). Other folks really like the 100-400L. All these are largely "good daylight" zooms, with f5 and f5.6 apertures at their longer focal lengths.  

For some sports, specialty lenses such as fisheye are sometimes used, too.

And there are a number of third party lenses that are possibile alternatives, depending upon your needs.

***********
Alan Myers

San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM 

[toby_ta]

I just have the Lens kit...18-135mm.. I want to do soccer and basketball, just relocated to the US, i'm an International student

[ebiggs1]

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens, as suggested above, is the lens for you. If you could possibly swing the extra $600+ bucks for the IS version, I would do it. 

This recommendation does not mean it is the end all, it just fits your stated budget. It is a very good "start".

[amfoto1]

Indoors for basketball often you don't need a really long lens, so a 70-200mm might be fine. Usually the biggest challenge is getting enough light indoors, so an f2.8 zoom would be ideal, but of course that drives the price up fast. The EF 70-200/2.8 non-IS might be found within your budget. Or a third party 70-200/2.8. If you get lucky, you might find a 70-200/2.8 IS "Mark I" used that's within your budget.... just be careful, at that price it might have a lot of wear and tear!

If the gym/arena lighting is really poor, I might switch to using 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 135/2 prime lenses for basketball. They aren't as convenient as a zoom, but allow one or more stops additional light. With basketball and other typical indoor court games there are times when even shorter lenses - 28 or 30mm prime, or 24-70/2.8 zoom - can be very useful. It depends upon your access to the sidelines.

Outdoors for soccer, especially during daytime, a 100-400 or similar third party zoom would work. With field sports you often need a longer telephoto. Alternative would be to add a teleconverter to a 70-200/2.8, but I'd be reluctant to use any more than a 1.4X and that only gets you to 280mm.  The combo of a 70-200/2.8 and a TC is probably over your budget, anyway.

***********
Alan Myers

San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM 

[ScottyP]

Aaaarrrrg. You had to say basketball, didn't you. (Ha)

Now that you are talking about indoor short distance sports, I agree with Amphoto about getting a fixed length (prime) lens with a wide aperture to let in a lot of light. I think an 85mm f/1.8 would work well, since our 1.6x crop camera would make it work like about 135mm. It is only about $350.00, so you could get it PLUS the 70-200 f/4 (which gives you 320mm on your crop body), and you'd have soccer and basketball fairly well covered, and basically within your budget.

[toby_ta]

I took photos at a college basketball game yesterday with a 18-135mm lens kit, the lowest aperture it could go was f4.... But then i had lotsa noise all over when i opened the picture up on my Laptop.

[diverhank]

The previous posters all made very good suggestions.  I just want to add a perspective for your consideration.  For a budget of $1000, it means you can only get one lens.  One lens that does both soccer and basketball will be tough.

The 70-200mm lens (be it f/2.8 or f/4) is a very fine lens except that for most case, there's not enough reach unless you've got front row seat.  You can add reach with a 1.4X (for both the f/2.8 or the f/4 lens) or a 2X (for the f/2.8 but not the f/4-you lose autofocus using it).  However, the teleconverter itself costs $400, not cheap and it slows autofocus down in addition to reduced image quality.  I don't like using it.

For Canon lenses, given the budget, there is only the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L and the 400mm f/5.6L.  Between these two, most people will choose the 100-400mm due to versatility but it costs more.  Personally I chose the 400mm f/5.6L, it's cheaper and sharper but you can't zoom and you don't have IS to help you.

My recommendation is therefore to get the 100-400mm lens.  You can get a used one for roughly $1000, maybe a bit more but it will most likely be the last telephoto zoom you will need.  It's bad form to recommend a non-Canon lens on the Canon forum but you might consider the Sigma 150-500mm or the Tamron 150-600mm.