Glass for baseball / soccer

mac81

Looking for a new lens for baseball / soccer. I currently use the Nikon 70-200 2.8 on a D300. I would like to purchase the 300mm f/2.8, but not in the budget. Would you recommend the Nikon 300mm f/4d or just add a teleconverter to the 70-200? If teleconverter, which one 14, 17, or 20? Any help would greatly be appreciated. Thanks!

JimKarczewski

1.4 would give you a 280 @ f4 on the long end.. so a little less than that 300, but with cropping you could make it up easy. Not sure of what the Nikon TC's add as far as image degradation. I know the newest canon's are much improved and should rightfully so for $500!

Moving Pictures

70-200 f2.8 is my workhorse lens for such sports. It's sufficient for infield play, but not the outfield.

jhefti

Not sure what the Nikon equivalent is, but I used to shoot soccer with a Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6. It worked great for day games and the image quality was quite good. In addition, the zoom allowed a lot of flexibility of coverage. I believe it cost me around $1600 new, but can't remember. I'm sure Nikon has a similar lens.

If you don't shoot night games and don't insist on the great subject isolation of a wider aperture, a zoom in this range may be just your thing. Then again, a 70-200mm f/2.8 will give you less coverage but better images. In general I find that trying to cover too much of the field results in a lot of blocked shots (but I still try anyway).

kdlanejr

Both sports do best with a 400 f/2.8

The non-VR will set you back less than the VR version. If you're shooting in daylight, put a 1.4x on your 70-200 and call it good. Spending on a 300 f/4 isn't a good idea unless you only shoot in good daylight. Adding the 1.4x to a 300 f/4 will make it a 420 f/5.6 which, depending on the body you are using, will slow your focus down and force higher iso's to keep your shutter speed up.

cbbr

My 70-200 and TC14III get along very well.

jhefti

kdlanejr wrote: »

Both sports do best with a 400 f/2.8

The non-VR will set you back less than the VR version. If you're shooting in daylight, put a 1.4x on your 70-200 and call it good. Spending on a 300 f/4 isn't a good idea unless you only shoot in good daylight. Adding the 1.4x to a 300 f/4 will make it a 420 f/5.6 which, depending on the body you are using, will slow your focus down and force higher iso's to keep your shutter speed up.

I'll wager that a 400/2.8 is more than he wants to spend. I use one, but it's not essential unless one is shooting night games (which I do all the time).

I've never used extenders, so can't speak to their performance vis-a-vis IQ and other matters, but a 1.4x extender may be the best option in terms of cost and versatility. Good reach for the day games, and night games can be shot without the extender to get the wider aperture (albeit without as much reach).