50mm f/1.2 L RF. I bought it in June and have made some of my best work with it. I loved the EF version but good copies are hard to find and it’s a touch soft. But the RF version is the perfect mix of the sharpness of the sigma 50 art and the character of the EF L. Same can be said for the 70-200 RF L.
I would fight god for this lens to come to the RF mount. I shoot weddings, music and pro wrestling and this lens covers 99.9% of my needs.
I really miss Andrew Kearns. His stuff is still worth checking out but damn it was always a good vibe.
Depending on what kind of sports you’re doing, 2.8 will be MUCH better for indoors and worth the extra money. I’ve been shooting pro wrestling a lot this year and for our outdoors shows, I’d be fine with f/4’s, but the moment we aren’t it is 100% a need for 2.8.
IMO 70-200 2.8 is worth every penny.
Also depending on your camera mount, a 70-200 2.8 from Tamron or Sigma might be worth it. If you’re on Sony or Nikon you could even consider the 35-150 2-2.8.
Yeah but then with that and my 70-200, I’m carrying 6lbs of glass at a time. 35-150 would let me drop a body and lens.