FT: trade for Nikon 300mm 2.8

PatStrangPatStrang Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
edited October 29, 2010 in Nikon Land
I am a college student who has built up a legitimate portfolio shooting sports but I need to make an upgrade if I want to take my pictures to the next level. I current own a Nikon D700, D300s, 80-200 2.8 and a 24-70 2.8. I would be willing to trade my 24-70 2.8, which is in excellent condition for a 300mm 2.8...does anyone have any tips as to how to market this idea, or am i barking up the stupid tree with an unrealistic idea? any feedback is appreciated...thanks!

- Pat

Comments

  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited October 17, 2010
    PatStrang wrote: »
    I am a college student who has built up a legitimate portfolio shooting sports but I need to make an upgrade if I want to take my pictures to the next level. I current own a Nikon D700, D300s, 80-200 2.8 and a 24-70 2.8. I would be willing to trade my 24-70 2.8, which is in excellent condition for a 300mm 2.8...does anyone have any tips as to how to market this idea, or am i barking up the stupid tree with an unrealistic idea? any feedback is appreciated...thanks!

    - Pat

    I don't see it happening Pat as the 300 goes for around $3,000 more than the 24-70.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • SeymoreSeymore Banned Posts: 1,539 Major grins
    edited October 18, 2010
    Pat... you may find a MF 300/2.8 as a trade. But as Harry mentioned, I think you'll be hard pressed to find an AF/AFS trade that would satisify your needs.
  • PatStrangPatStrang Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 18, 2010
    yeah thats kinda what I thought...thanks for the feedback guys
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited October 18, 2010
    PatStrang wrote: »
    I am a college student who has built up a legitimate portfolio shooting sports but I need to make an upgrade if I want to take my pictures to the next level. I current own a Nikon D700, D300s, 80-200 2.8 and a 24-70 2.8. I would be willing to trade my 24-70 2.8, which is in excellent condition for a 300mm 2.8...does anyone have any tips as to how to market this idea, or am i barking up the stupid tree with an unrealistic idea? any feedback is appreciated...thanks!

    - Pat

    You've got the camera's....Consider the 300 f/4?
    tom wise
  • PatStrangPatStrang Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 18, 2010
    Yeah I have considered it but I have also heard negative reviews about that lens...I know people that use the 80-400 and love it so now I am thinking about that but I have heard they are going to update it soon so I may just wait until next football season to see what's out there
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited October 18, 2010
    PatStrang wrote: »
    Yeah I have considered it but I have also heard negative reviews about that lens...I know people that use the 80-400 and love it so now I am thinking about that but I have heard they are going to update it soon so I may just wait until next football season to see what's out there


    Wow! You got me. I got one, the AF not the AFS, and it is stellar. Check out the Wildlife Forum here in Dgrin and I think You'll seem some images from the 300 f/4 line that are quite nice!
    tom wise
  • dgwatcherdgwatcher Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
    edited October 19, 2010
    IMHO you can use the 300 f/4 for sports with decent results. It does not focus as fast as the 300 f/2.8 but it focuses way faster than the 80-400. If it gets a little dark you have the advantage of using the D700 at higher ISO's to help make up for the lack of a 2.8 lens. I think you would be pretty disappointed trying to use the 80-400 for sports. It is slower to focus (not AF-S) and is f/4.5-5.6. It does have VR, but that doesn't help with action photos. You can rent either lens pretty reasonably, definitely recommend this before buying so you know what you are getting. I'd also venture to say you can make some great photos with the gear you have. I shot sports for an upper tier Div-I college for years with a manual focus, film camera, and a 70-200 f/4.5 zoom, along with a 200 f/2.8 prime. The SI department eventually bought a 300 f/2.8 which we rotated through the photography staff. It was a treat to use and you can get good shots, but there are plenty of nice opportunities in most of college sports to be had with what you are currently using. There are shots you can get with the 300 you can't get with what you have but by the same token there are things you can shoot with your lenses a 300 just wouldn't handle well. I'd say baseball might be the toughest without a longer lens, but even so, you have the D300 to help get some reach with the DX factor. In 1985 I would have killed for the flexibility and ability of the equipment you have now. Of course, I would have also killed for my own 300 f/2.8. I don't think you want to give up your 24-70 and take the financial hit on the trade, at least I wouldn't. I go the 300 f/4 route. Another option is to rent the 300 f/2.8 every once in a while, you don't have to use one at every game.
  • barnyardbarnyard Registered Users Posts: 50 Big grins
    edited October 24, 2010
    Look for a Tamron 300 2.8. Back in my day, they were close to half the price and pretty darn good quality.
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited October 26, 2010
    PatStrang wrote: »
    Yeah I have considered it but I have also heard negative reviews about that lens...I know people that use the 80-400 and love it so now I am thinking about that but I have heard they are going to update it soon so I may just wait until next football season to see what's out there


    I have the 80-400 and the 300 f/4. The 300 f/4 was recommended to me by Ron Reznick. Ron told me that once I shot with the 300 f/4 the 80-400 would be gathering dust on my shelf. He was pretty much on the mark.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • TpsfotoTpsfoto Registered Users Posts: 175 Major grins
    edited October 29, 2010
    I too started with a Tammy 300mm f2.8 .... it was a super lens & even the Tokina 300mm F2.8 is a real fine starter......
    If you can hold off ..... when you get a 400mm F2.8 .... the 300 will stay in the bag.

    Good luck!
    Larry
Sign In or Register to comment.