Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 23, 2007, 10:07 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Default

Hello all,

I´m new to this dSLR world and i recently bought a Nikon D80 - and i´m loving it - it came with a 18-70 lens and i bought a 50-f/1.8 last week (it takes osme amazing pics).

I will buy soon a zoom lens, something that allows me to go a bit further.

My favourite subjects are sports and wildlife, so my question to all of you photograph & nikon experts is which lens to pick? I´ve read a few things about the 18-200VR and the 70-300VR, is there any others i should consider for this purpose? what´s your thoughts on this?



Thanks in advance
Joao Ferreira is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 23, 2007, 10:16 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd let members know what kind of sports you want to shoot and in what conditions.

For example, night sports in a stadium under the lights may require a lens with f/2.8 available throughout it's focal range (which adds size, weight and cost). A zoom like the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 isn't going to be bright enough for that purpose (you'd get too much motion blur from subject movement). A lens with f/2.8 available is 4 times as bright as a lens that only has f/5.6 available if you zoom in much. ;-)

Indoor sports like basketball may be better served with a brighter prime (even an f/2.8 zoom may not be bright enough to be practical in some gyms). Something like an 85mm f/1.8 may be a better bet.

But, for daytime sports, something like the 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR lens you're interesting in may work just fine.

Your vantage point will also be a consideration (i.e., can you shoot from the sidelines).

So, I'd let members know what kind of sports and the conditions you plan on shooting in for better responses. Low light sports will require a very different lens selection compared to sports in good light.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 10:25 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Default

I´m moreof a motorsports fan - motogp mainly, as i follow two to three races a year - i´ll probably won´t do any indoor sports.

Regarding wildlife ... well ... anything, animals, flowers, trees, landscapes ... etc ... just in case i need to stay far from the subject i need to bring it closer...



Cheers


Joao Ferreira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 10:54 AM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Races, huh?

As long as it's in good light, that 70-300mm VR you're looking at would probably work OK.

If budget permitted, I'd probably look at a higher quality and brighter 70-200mm or 80-200mm f/2.8 zoom instead though, and use a TC with it when something longer is needed. For example, a Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, or 80-200mm f/2.8, or a third party alternative like a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM lens instead. Then, use a TC (Teleconverter) with one if you shoot in conditions where you need something longer.

That would be a larger and heavier solution. But, a brighter zoom would give you more flexibilty to use it in more conditions. Any choice is going to have tradeoffs.

I'll let Nikon shooters comment on the pros and cons. I think we have a few shooters here that like to take photos of motorsports. So, they may see the thread and respond at some point.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 5:01 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 214
Default

Hi Joao

I use a Nikon D50 with the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM lens and olso the Sigma 1.4 T/C and find it a very good combination, this picture is without T/C, 1/320 @ f8,iso200 and 200mm
Attached Images
 
colinl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2007, 5:07 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 214
Default

and this one with T/C 1/640, f14, 280mm, iso 1600
Attached Images
 
colinl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2007, 3:36 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

As a motor sports photographer permit me to comment. Jim is right about the 70/300 but really, if you are going to be at big events, you wont be near enough and the lens won't consequentially be long enough. The problem of digital photography is that it is a vicious spiral, sucking your wallet dry before you know it. If it is at all cloudy the 70/300 will result in a slow shutter speed unless you up the ISO considerably and the result won't be a pleasing photo in either case. You really need good glass at f2.8 if the budget will run to it, whether it be Sigma or Nikon. Here is a photo taken with the 70/200 plus the TC14E teleconverter which turns the lens into 98/280mm with a maximum aperture of f3.5. It is heavily cropped since I was some way from the action but is good enough. Now if money isn't a proble, the lens of choice would be the 200/400 though! Now that IS a lens!
Attached Images
 
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2007, 7:50 AM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Joao Ferreira wrote:
Quote:
I´m moreof a motorsports fan - motogp mainly, as i follow two to three races a year - i´ll probably won´t do any indoor sports.

Regarding wildlife ... well ... anything, animals, flowers, trees, landscapes ... etc ... just in case i need to stay far from the subject i need to bring it closer...
Actually I'm quite surprise that no one mentioned the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX... since you're not doing any indoor sport

The VR is not going to get you much in sport because you'll need a higher shutter speed anyway to freeze motion. The Sigma is faster @ f/4 and comes with HSM (Nikon AF-S), it is also sharper than any lens + teleconverter combo (the lens is actually sharper than some Canon 300mm prime!). It's also costs less than a 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4xTC (and slighly longer too @ 300mm vs only 280mm)

The other cool thing about this Sigma 100-300 EX is since it's an f/4, one can add a x1.4 TC and it'll become a 140-420 f/5.6 zoom and still remains relatively sharp. (Actually this combo is still as sharp as the Canon's 100-400L)
Check it out: :idea:
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=82
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2007, 1:19 PM   #9
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
The other cool thing about this Sigma 100-300 EX is since it's an f/4, one can add a x1.4 TC and it'll become a 140-420 f/5.6 zoom and still remains relatively sharp. (Actually this combo is still as sharp as the Canon's 100-400L)
Check it out: :idea:
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=82
Those Motorcycle Race Shots are super.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2007, 1:25 PM   #10
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

No stabilization though. It might be even better in lower light on a Sony or Pentax so that you didn't have to use a monopod if you wanted to pan and shoot at slower shutter speeds and lower ISO speeds. ;-) Sigma should make an OS version.

Quote:
I'm using a Canon 20D with a Sigma 100-300 f/4. Some of the shots have a 1.4 tc attached. Also, I ALWAYS use a monopod
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=91064&forum_id=82

Those are really good shots with it, especially using a TC.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:47 PM.