Limited Budget - need advice on lens with Nikon D3100

S

somewhereindublin

Messages
1
Name
Colm
Edit My Images
Yes
Bear with me. I am a VERY amateur photographer. I like taking photos at football matches. All the numbers and language when it comes to camera equipment is like listening to mountain bikers talking about their equipment!
I have a Nikon D3100. Old I know, but it works. I bought it new about 13-14 years ago, it has served us well at parties and on holidays etc. I got an AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR for photographing 9 a side matches 2 years ago.
For 9-a-side in good day light, the photos are generally pretty good.
On a full size 11-a-side, my photos are also quite good when I am located behind a goal with the action coming towards me, again, assuming good daylight. The photos even get compliments. I generally just use Sports mode on the camera! I would post photos for feedback but at the moment, they are all of kids aged 13 and under, so I won't.
At evening games, whether under flood lights or not, or very dull days, the photos are usable but by and large, crap. I realise that the key number is f/ ....
With the help of chatgpt I tried a few settings I would not normally use:
  • Mode: M (manual)
  • Aperture: lowest available number (f/4.5–5.6 on your lens, depending on zoom)
  • Shutter speed: start at 1/800 second
  • ISO: Auto ISO, with the maximum set to 3200
  • Autofocus: AF-C (continuous autofocus)
Apart from the old camera, I know that the key limiting factor is the lens.
I used Claude and ChatGPT to get some advice... I am now looking at a used Sigma 120-300mm F/2.8 EX DG OS HSM, Nikon Fit. The "Sports" version is prohibitively expensive. I see I can find a 120-300mm F/2.8 EX DG OS HSM for about €700-€1000, depending on condition. I'd be happy to pay whatever import charges there are if I buy from the UK. Loads are available in Japan, again import charges fine as long as I know what I'm getting.
Budget permitting next year, I read that upgrading to a Nikon Z50 II (mirrorless... again... another new word!) would make another big difference (I realise I will need an Z - F adapter, assuming I keep the Sigma lens. Whatever lens I buy, I would like to be able to hold onto it whenever I upgrade the camera.

So a few questions:
1. If you used a Sigma 120-300mm F/2.8 EX DG OS HSM, were you happy with it?
2. Is my plan acceptable, or a complete waste of money?
3. Replacing the camera at the same time is just not going to happen, so will using with D3100 still produce better photos than with my current setup?
4. I see a lot of them for sale cheaply, but a common problem is Auto-Focus is not working. Is that fixable? There are a few good camera fixers around Dublin that I am aware of.
5. Are there known problems with the Auto-Focus on that lens?
6. Any other suggestions for a budget of about £800-£900?
Thanks for reading and patience.
 
Last edited:
No one replied so:

For sports I'd really look at a more modern and higher grade camera. But not new on your budget. The difference in focus systems and low light noise will be huge. Something like a D7200 has much better low light focus and some tracking ability (£350 used) If you got a D500 (£600+, might drop soon) it will seem like magic compared to a D3100. Even a really old D300 (£100) would focus better (still be noisy though) in low light as it is designed more for sports and action.

Super-zooms are not my thing so I can't comment on the lens. The f/2.8 will help in low light but the camera's focus system will still be slow and have a big lag between pressing the shutter button and taking the picture. You also need to find out about that particular lens focus speed. Big f/2.8 lenses have a lot of glass to move about.

Fixing a lens is difficult and needs parts. If there are a lot of them with a common fault, it might not be repairable at a reasonable cost.

I think you deserve respect for getting good pictures on the camera you are using. That is hard.
 
Is the D3100 a plastic mount camera? If so, I'd be wary of attaching a big heavy lens on the front...

I would also be wary of a 3rd party lens on the camera, I've had compatibility issues on a D810 with a Sigma EX lens, whereby the lens stopped working but it was fine on the D500...

My suggestion would be the AF-S G 80-400 (the newer variant) and a newer body (preferably D7*00) series, something that can handle high ISOs better than the D3100 (and has a metal mount)...

I have nothing against Sigma optically, their lenses are very good but before you buy one give it a try and see if you enjoy handling it.
 
If it's a Heavy lens you'd want it to have a tripod/monopod attachment on the actual lens whatever you opt for. A Nikkor 70-210 is worth looking at MPB (Brighton).

I'd also look at moving to Full Frame if you can at some point
 
I suspect you'd see the biggest difference keeping the same lens but with a D500 body than changing the lens and keeping the D3100 body, as suggested by @Erty. Might be worth seeing if you can try a used one somewhere. Do be aware though, the D500 is much larger than what you're used to, and it will feel big in your hands to begin with.
 
Another vote for a higher grade body ,if the d500 is to expensive and it really needs XQD cards to make it perform a D7500 is probably a better option for you , again I would advise against third party lenses which will often need a micro adjust . So the Nikon 80-400G lens is a super option and can be used wide open and is still sharp . Or alternatively a Nikon 200-500 if you find one at the right price
 
A D500 would be a good shout. You'll get better autofocus, better high iso so you can push it all the way up, nicer ergonomics and you won't lose any reach like moving to a full frame camera.

If you don't have any good post processing software I'd look at spending a little on some with decent noise reduction. With that in place I don't worry about shooting at ISO levels I wouldn't have even dreamed of 5 years ago.

Edit: if you want an extra stop of light on the long end you could look for a Nikon 300mm PF. It's a prime lens so you lose some versatility of a zoom, but you gain really quick focussing, especially on a D500. I was using it on my Z6 to shoot U9s rugby and getting great results - wish I had a crop body for the extra reach. Also, as it's a PF lens its actually very small for a 300.

If you're patient I think you could get a D500 and the 300 PF at around your budget. Or get the camera first and then later get the lens.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top