Nikon 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8 for motorsport

yamahatdm900

yamahatdm900

Messages
6,216
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Hopfully in a few weeks time I be in the position to splash out the money to get a nice new shiny lens.
It will be mainly for motorsport and bike racing mainly. At the minute im using a sigma 100-300 with the 1.4tc (camera is a D300s). Im lusting after a f2.8 prime either the 300 or 400.
My main question what is the handbility difference between the 300 and 400, as in panning and gneral use for a day/weekend at a track. Tha reach of the extra reach of the 400 would come in handy at times, I do normally use a monopod and I probaly get the 1.4 and maybe 1.7 tc.
if i get the 300 I would probaly get a nikon 70 - 210 f2.8 as well, while if it was the 400 im thinking along the lines of keeping the 100 - 300 f4 or If i go mad the 120 - 300 sigma.
Opinions suggestions please.:thinking:
 
Not a direct reply, but your last comment re the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 (including 1.4x TC usage) shouldn't be overlooked, especially for the cost difference.
 
Thanks for the reply. For once if plans work out as I hope in the next work, while cost is always a factor it not will be the overiding factor. This would be the only time I will be even dreaming of spending this sort of money on a lens, so trying to get as many opinions or info as possible.
 
Can't be that bad Digitall carries it up on Cad, and he pans up there with it.
 
The 400mm is hand holdable. I've been with Allan up Cad when he's used it. I hand hold my 200-400mm vr and its ok too. Another option for you. F4 is fine. Very sharp lens.

Kev.
 
a 400mm prime is a very restricting lens at a track, there'll be places it'll be too long even for bikes, i'd go for the 200-400mm if I could afford it or the 300mm and a 1.4TC for the extra flexibility.
 
wack61 said:
a 400mm prime is a very restricting lens at a track, there'll be places it'll be too long even for bikes, i'd go for the 200-400mm if I could afford it or the 300mm and a 1.4TC for the extra flexibility.
Click to expand...
I already have a sigma 100-300, I do like it but not in the nikon prime class. If I got the 400 I would take this as well.
Or it is get a 300 and tahe this with a 70 - 200 instead.
 
I use the 300mm 2.8 the most. But have started using the 200-400mm a lot again. It's easy to forget how good it is and and the ability to zoom is a godsend at times.

I'm in love with it all over again. :D

I'm staying with the family near Oxford from Monday in the caravan. Somewhere called Whitney? I don't mind if you want to pop over one evening and try them both. Assuming my wife hasn't got plans to drag me somewhere that evening. :D

Kev.
 
Make no bones about it, its a heavy lens to carry about all day.I considered it before getting a 500 f4 which easier to handhold. The 400 is heavy in the wrong place--in that i mean at the end of the lens where your arm is extending to---i wouldnt think about it if intending to handhold for any length of time at all.As said above the 300 f2.8 with the option of a tc would be good, especially if you dont intend to take a mono or tripod.

I find the 120-300 quite easy now and can happily walk around with it for a day or so but i have been using the 500 f4 handheld for many hours and gotten used to that.The zoom feature is invaluable at times and most of the time its use with a tc on it--have a look at my flickr as most pics were with the 120-300 handheld.
 
kevshore said:
I use the 300mm 2.8 the most. But have started using the 200-400mm a lot again. It's easy to forget how good it is and and the ability to zoom is a godsend at times.

I'm in love with it all over again. :D

I'm staying with the family near Oxford from Monday in the caravan. Somewhere called Whitney? I don't mind if you want to pop over one evening and try them both. Assuming my wife hasn't got plans to drag me somewhere that evening. :D

Kev.
Click to expand...
Blast, Im away next week work. Typical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top