Lens for Sports (Skiing, surfing, lacrosse...)

 

Bronze Member
Username: Bogner

Post Number: 36
Registered: Aug-05
Which should I look for. I have a Nikon D70s. I am looking at renting a couple to test before I make the purchase.

I am not in the market as of right now, but I am researching with the Nikkor line and I have some questions.

My budget will be around $1000 when I am in the market. I like the 300mm f/4D, but is it a great lens for Sports such as skiing, surfing and lacrosse.

Also, what is the difference b/t a lens that is say 80-300mm and a lens that is just 300mm?

Also, what is the difference b/t a lens that is f/4 and f.2.8? Does the f/2.8 allow mor elight or less light? I have trouble with flip flopping the numbers.

Thank you in adavance!
 

Gold Member
Username: Project6

Post Number: 4022
Registered: Dec-03
Try the 70-200 f/2.8G ED IF AF-S VR. This lens is just about perfect for sports. For an extra reach try the 80-400 f/4.5-5.6 D ED VR.

The 300mm f/4 D is a great lens for sports, just do not forget your mono pod. Hand holding for sports takes practice.

The difference:
80-300, the zoom can be changed from 80mm to 300 mm. If you are planning on getting this lens for sports shooting, be aware that this lens is cheap for a reason. Works great, however if you are using it on a bright clear day.

300 -- this lens is fixed at 300mm and cannot be adjusted.

f/4 and f/2.8 - the smaller number means a bigger aperture. Think of it in fractions and it will be easier to remember. F/4 = ¼ of the light will get in, and f/2 will let in ½ of the light.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Bogner

Post Number: 37
Registered: Aug-05
Do the extra features on the 70-200 such as SWM, IF, and M/A warrant the $500 difference in price? What are the advantages of the 70-200 over the 80-400? Thank you!
 

Bronze Member
Username: Bogner

Post Number: 38
Registered: Aug-05
Also, what about the 80-200mm?
 

Gold Member
Username: Project6

Post Number: 4030
Registered: Dec-03
Featurewise, it is worth the price but picture quality and sharpnes, I think they are the same.
I traded in my 80-200 for a 70-200 VR. And it was wonderful. The VR features let you go at least 2 steps slower on the shutter speed without compromising the focus. The Silent Wave Motor really snaps everything into focus very quickly and is very noticeable after using the 80-200 for quite sometime. The 70-200 is also a few ounces lighter than the 80-200.

If you have a tighter budget, get the 80-200 without the AF-S, you can probably get it for around $800. It is one of the fastest and sharpest lens I have ever used.

The 80-400 is a great lens as well, but it is suited for a different type of shooting. The extra reach is great if you like taking photos of very far away objects and your subjects do not like the intrusion of a photographer. It is a very different piece of glass when compared to the 70-200 and not in the same class so it is not a good comparison at all.
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us