craig_morton Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I am in the market to upgrade my kit for sports. I have been shooting with a D50 for the past year and a half with a 50mm f/1.8 for basketball and an old school 70-210mm f/4-5.6 for outdoor sports (soccer, baseball etc). For the past year I have been shooting for a local paper to cover high school sports (not my day job). This is merely a semi-pro situation but one that has allowed me to challenge myself, increase my skills, and along with that my expectations have also increased. After much success and accolades I expect “more” from my gear. My dilemma is this: I have taken some very good images with my AF 70-210 Nikkor. But I’ll be the first to admit that on cloudy days I am hard pressed to shoot any anything under 1600 ISO in order to stop the action. This has lead me to believe that I need a faster lens (Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 or Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8) in order to improve my IQ. (note: the AF-S 70-200mm VR is out of my price range). Again, my sports shooting is not my day job I recently replace my 50mm 1.8 with an 85mm 1.8 to give me better reach for basketball (shooting at 6 mp, this was the best, most obvious solution for indoor sports)—crops at 1600 ISO just wasn’t cutting it) However, for outdoor sports I am in a quandary. I definitely need faster AF than my current 70-210mm can give me….but this is a 75 dollar lens, and at 10 times the cost I am not convinced I will get 10 times better an image.. From the research I have been reviewing the optics on the older AF 70-210mm is quite competitive with the 80-200 f/2.8. And quite honestly, from the surprising results I have gotten with the old school lens, I can see where this sentiment is coming from. I am thinking if I scrap my current 70-210mm and try and find a D it will focus faster and that would help solve my AF speed needs. Naturally, a pro lens would solve that problem but again, I am worried if I get a pro f/2.8 ($700-$800) lens to get just one F stop advantage I would have buyers remorse after finding that in essence the images produced might only be nominally better in IQ than the 70-210mm. Obviously, upgrading to a more advanced body would help matters, but here is where things get complicated so I’ll sum it up this way. Would you rather: 1) Keep shooting with D50 and cave in for a pro level f/2.8 tele (either the Nikon 80-200mm or the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8). ($700-$800) OR 2) Considering optics are a wash…How about instead get t a gently used Nikkor 70-210mm D ($200-$250) and put the “savings” towards a D300. With the knowledge that the faster AF on the D300 body will make up the difference in AF speed. I welcome your thoughts. T.C. Morton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Brennan Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Craig, You put two good options here. Whilst a D300 combined with your existing zoom lens will allow you to consitantly shoot at ISO 1600 without major noise penalties and give you some shutter speed gain - you will already have a grip on what a 'faster' aperture lens will do for you when you shoot with your 50mm f/1.8. My 20 cents worth says always go for better glass, the body can come later. Either the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 or the Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 will give you significant shutter speed gain on your D50 and any other body you choose to upgrade to in the future. I used the Sigma 70-200mm for 18 months and was very pleased with it's performance and reproduction. It is a HSM lens (built in Auto Focus servo motor) and is likely to focus faster on your D50 than the Nikkor 80-200mm AF- the Sigma was a little faster on my D200 than the Nikkor. I'd stick with the D50 and try either of the Nikkor AF 80-200mm f/2.8 or the Sigma HSM 70-200mm f/2.8 - most gains to made this way. I made the jump from f/4-5.6 zooms to f/2.8 zooms on the D200 and found it to be a minor revelation for action photography. I don't think a D model 70-210mm lens will focus much faster than a non D version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 one of the problems with shooting sports on a d50 is the frame rate. at 2.5 fps with a slow variable aperture lens, you will miss some shots. so a d300 at 6fps/8 with the grip would give you considerable improvement in that area. a used d200 would also up your speed, but its ISO performance is worse than the d50's. which brings us to the next requirement for sports: high ISO. you'd see an improvement of about a stop with either a d90 or a d300, but you still need a fast lens for a complete 'semi-pro' kit. which brings us back to your original question: body or lens. well, for one thing, a d300 is considerably more expensive than a $7-800 lens. (it's confusing that you're willing to spend $1500+ on a body but only half that on glass). but even if you get a d300, you're still shooting at 5.6 on the long end. so take matthew's advice and get the 2.8 zoom first, since you'll need it anyway. bottom line: you might not really be taking advantage of the d300's frame rate with a slow-focusing old school lens. i'd go for the sigma HSM since your AF needs allt he help it can get (or the 80-200 AF-S nikkor if you can find one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_margolis Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 The new Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 received some nice reviews, especially their optics. Sounds like a great option except for one thing..... the lack of an internal motor. Since you want this for sports and your output is newsprint, I also would consider the Sigma alternative. The D300 would be a great improvement with 6 fps/faster AF/better ISO but IMO, get the lens you need first. The body price will continue to plunge as newer/faster bodies are released, the lens price won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colda Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Hi Craig I shoot sports (football, well, soccer to you over on the other side of the pond) and 99.9% of the time I shoot with a D300 + 80-200/2.8 AF-S I've owned the D50 and the 70-210 AF as well as having the 70-210 AF-D and whilst the AF speed on the D version is an improvement I would not use it for sports My advice would be to juggle things around in order to get the D300 and the 80-200/2.8 if it's at all possible, failing that then go for the 80-200/2.8 AF-S and get a used D200 as soon as you can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg_s1 Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Craig, i have used the push-pull-nikkor (80-200/2.8D) for many thousand sport-shots. Its a good lens and if bought used it will hold its value. Today i use the 70-200 VR and the fat 200 VR but i will never let the dusty push-pull-nikkor go. In Your situation i would get a good used 80-200 Nikkor (two-ring or push-pull) first and save for a D300. Nikons new AF-system is really nice - compared to my old D2H and D200 the AF of my D700 is much faster. georg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now