Nikon 200mm f/2 VR vs. 70-200mm f/2.8 VR

MDalbyMDalby Registered Users Posts: 697 Major grins
edited March 21, 2011 in Sports
OK, insanity may be setting in. I may be thinking about investing in a 200mm f/2. I already have the 70-200 f/2.8. If I can only have one lens for both basketball and football, does it make sense to go to the 200mm f/2.0?

I normally shoot at 90mm for basketball. I am not sure about a 200mm prime for basketball.

Thoughts?
Nikon D4, 400 2.8 AF-I, 70-200mm 2.8 VR II, 24-70 2.8
CBS Sports MaxPreps Shooter
http://DalbyPhoto.com

Comments

  • toragstorags Registered Users Posts: 4,615 Major grins
    edited March 19, 2011
    I have the 70/200 & a 300 2.8.

    Ahh... the prime vs zoom arguement

    I've tried the 300 for moving things that come to/away from me and I felt restrained & missed opportunities in motor sports. But at surfing w tc it's good or with subjects that don't move longer distances

    Just my .02
    Rags
  • MitchellMitchell Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited March 19, 2011
    You've already answered your question. You shoot most of your basketball at 90mm. A 200mm will be way too long for you. If you are positioned under the basket, your best bet will be in the 50-85mm range. What don't you like about your 70-200mm lens for B-ball?

    Oh, and 200mm on your D700 will likely be too short for Football. I shoot a lot of soccer with my D700. I use my 300mm, f2.8 with and without teleconvertors.
    Mitch
    http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 19, 2011
    Mitchell wrote: »
    I use my 300mm, f2.8 QUOTE]

    Just had to get that in, didn't you. :D
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • MitchellMitchell Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited March 19, 2011
    Icebear wrote: »
    Mitchell wrote: »
    I use my 300mm, f2.8 QUOTE]

    Just had to get that in, didn't you. :D

    John, you know I love that lens.

    What glass are you hiding from your wife??mwink.gif
    Mitch
    http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited March 19, 2011
    Mitchell wrote: »
    Icebear wrote: »

    John, you know I love that lens.

    What glass are you hiding from your wife??mwink.gif

    Well, since she saw my signature line, not much any more. Maybe my new (not yet) 300 f2.8:D.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • JimKarczewskiJimKarczewski Registered Users Posts: 969 Major grins
    edited March 21, 2011
    The 200/2's are great lenses, but like everyone else mentioned, if you are shooting at 90.. why bother?

    Other alternative is get the 200/2 and a 1.4TC so you can use it as a 280/2.8 for shooting the other side of the court... Then when you need a 200 you can also use it as a 200..

    I for the longest time wanted a 200/1.8 (canon) but they stopped servicing them last year.. in it's place they did a 200/2 IS... But that 200/1.8 was one of the sharpest ever made by canon (or anyone else for that matter) rating a 4.8 out of 5 on the photodo.com scale.. which is very impressive.
    Jim Karczewski - http://www.jimkarczewski.com
  • JacobovsJacobovs Registered Users Posts: 491 Major grins
    edited March 21, 2011
    I shoot basketball with 2 lenses. 24-70 f2.8 and the 200mm f2. I find the 300mm f2.8 too long for basketball, but I may be in the minority, most of the pros next to me use the 300mm, 70-200mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8. I love the 200mm f2 for the dof.
    www.jacobovitz.smugmug.com
Sign In or Register to comment.