and the site receives a small commission
300mm F4 AF-S for sports
- Thread starter whitey
- Start date
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Why not Chris, if he cant afford an f/2.8 then f/4 is well good enough now the summer is on its way, also i dont know of any cricket tog who shoots any faster than f/4
Its not anyones first choice but if the money aint there then its good enough, the AF is certainally fast on the Nikon 300 f/4
Dont forget that the overwhelming majority of my stuff even in poor light are shot with a 1.4x attached giving me f/4
Its not anyones first choice but if the money aint there then its good enough, the AF is certainally fast on the Nikon 300 f/4
Dont forget that the overwhelming majority of my stuff even in poor light are shot with a 1.4x attached giving me f/4
- Messages
- 2,497
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I can't speak from experience regarding sports, but I find my 300 f4 with 1.4tc is sometimes slow to autofocus and searches quite a lot in lower light.
Correct, however stephen is shooting on a d300, which is a great camera with nice light ( have one myself) , but he is going to stuggle at f4 a few months down the line. Summer comes and goes very quickly unfortunatly
Not sure how much the price comparison to a good pre owned , but must be worth waiting for
Last edited:
- Messages
- 877
- Edit My Images
- No
As has been said, the f4 will do you fine at this time of the year for the typical 1500 kick-off time. But, as we all know the bulk of the football season is played when the days are at their shortest and the light is weakest, and the f4 won't do you much good when we get back round there again, even 2.8 isn't always enough! I used my old (Canon) 300 f4 once at my first Sunday League cup final three years ago and it seemed decent enough.
Are you planning to do any summer sports, such as cricket? If you are, then it'll be fine for that and you can maybe put it towards a 2.8 in the future. But, if you're only getting it for the remaining month or so of the football season and the first month or so of next season when it's still light enough, then it probably won't be worth it. Don't let your visit to Wembley rush you into it though, nothing worse than rushing into an expensive deal with one game (that could be poor) in mind and regretting it when you're stuck with it in the winter, useless.
Are you planning to do any summer sports, such as cricket? If you are, then it'll be fine for that and you can maybe put it towards a 2.8 in the future. But, if you're only getting it for the remaining month or so of the football season and the first month or so of next season when it's still light enough, then it probably won't be worth it. Don't let your visit to Wembley rush you into it though, nothing worse than rushing into an expensive deal with one game (that could be poor) in mind and regretting it when you're stuck with it in the winter, useless.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 29733
Guest
When I started shooting my local rugby club in September 2010, all I had was a D5000 and a Sigma 150-500 f5.6-f6.3 and it was fine. I used my 150-500 last Saturday and it was great.
Then just before the autumn/winter started I invested in a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 and a D300s.
If I hadn't at least got my 2.8 lens then I would not have been able to carry on during the dark winter months.
Then just before the autumn/winter started I invested in a Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 and a D300s.
If I hadn't at least got my 2.8 lens then I would not have been able to carry on during the dark winter months.
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,072
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For once, I whole heartily agree
Correct, however stephen is shooting on a d300, which is a great camera with nice light ( have one myself) , but he is going to stuggle at f4 a few months down the line. Summer comes and goes very quickly unfortunatly
Not sure how much the price comparison to a good pre owned , but must be worth waiting for
But in 'a few months down the line' the 2nd hand value of a 300 f4 won't have dropped much, if anything at all and so by upgrading he would be making little to no loss. Money in the bank in the mean time would be at risk of temptation to spend on something else! Not to mention gaining experience of shooting with a long prime lens.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,433
- Name
- Andrea
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A few years back when I was a Canon user I used a 300mm f/4 for several football matches at Conference level (couldn't justify the cost of a f/2.8) and it served me very well for daytime matches. Obviously you'd struggle in low light and poor conditions but at Wembley in May it really ought to be fine and, as noted above, the Nikon will hold its value well if you decide to 'trade up' at the end of the summer for the f/2.8.
I used a 300mm f/4 for several football matches at Conference level (couldn't justify the cost of a f/2.8) and it served me very well for daytime matches. Obviously you'd struggle in low light and poor conditions but at Wembley in May it really ought to be fine and, as noted above, the Nikon will hold its value well if you decide to 'trade up' at the end of the summer for the f/2.8.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well i dont think any footy/rugby player ive seen moves faster than a Speeding car
- Messages
- 12,786
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't see why not for daytime matches. I've been using a 70-200 /4 IS as my short lens since January, and whilst not perfect in all circumstances it certainly gets the job done on either a 7D (which would be a close equivalent of the d300) or 1DmkIII even in some pretty grotty weather. Under lights it would obviously be a different matter.