Nikon 400mm

R

Ross_Evans

Messages
162
Name
ROSS
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm starting out in Footy photography and have been advised that the Nikon 400mm f2.8 would be an ideal lens?

Has anybody used one?

I know they are pricey brand new and seem very hard to come by second hand!!

I welcome all help and advice!!
 
Hairyduck said:
what are you planning to shoot with it?
Click to expand...

Footy :D

Either a 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 will be fine.. both are used regularly by professionals.

If you are only starting out though, and doing (presumably) Sunday football, non-league etc then maybe a 300 f4 would be a consideration. You may struggle under floodlights but depending on your body, you can throw the ISO right up - should be less of an issue as we continue in to spring and summer though.

Alternatively, a 70-200 2.8 and a 1.4 tele convertor may be a good option. Use the tele convetor whilst you have ample light, then take it off and concentrate on action in the box with the f2.8 whilst under floodlights.

I've only offered these alternatives because you haven't set a budget down for us to work with! :)
 
Started off with Sunday league football and Non-league, but recently stepped up to the Football league!!

However i have found it a struggle to cover the whole pitch with just a 70-200 2.8 so wanted to take the next step up!! Obviously i'd prefer second hand to brand new!!
My budget will be as cheap as possible!!:thumbs:
 
You could look at the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 for that. Some love it, some say it's no good.

I am in the first camp.:D:D:D
 
I would say go for a 300 over the 400 as it will give you more options for covering the game. my 400 is lovely but if i get to a game and can't sit behind the goals its a little bit too long :( a 300 however can happily bag the piccies from the sidelines (which is why ive just bought one :D)

Are you using a two body setup yet?
 
Ross_Evans said:
Started off with Sunday league football and Non-league, but recently stepped up to the Football league!!

However i have found it a struggle to cover the whole pitch with just a 70-200 2.8 so wanted to take the next step up!! Obviously i'd prefer second hand to brand new!!
My budget will be as cheap as possible!!:thumbs:
Click to expand...

Try and find a 2nd hand 300 2.8, I use one for football and it's a lovely combo with a 70-200! It gives good range down field but also allows you to use inside the box if you want tight in on some action, whereas the 400 would be too long.

It depends on your shooting style though and what you want to go for.. obviously the 300 wouldn't pick up a nasty tackle past the half way line!

If the Nikon 300 is anything like Canon's it'll take the tele convertors well which is handy for cricket :)

barneyrubble said:
You could look at the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 for that. Some love it, some say it's no good.

I am in the first camp.:D:D:D
Click to expand...

Another great suggestion :)
 
I have 2 bodies, but just using the 70-200 at the moment, that's why i feel i need to invest in the 400mm, but obviously the price is very high!!
Unfortunately the games i cover only allow me to sit behind the goal so i miss most of the action at the other end!!
 
barneyrubble said:
You could look at the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 for that. Some love it, some say it's no good.

I am in the first camp.:D:D:D
Click to expand...

A lens im looking at aswell, with a bit of extra length :naughty: over the canon zoom it would be a handy addition, the mixed reviews do put me off though
 
I find that the mixed reviews are from people who have moved up to the Branded 300 F2.8s.

They are better than the Sigma, but by how much? They cost 2.5 times as much secondhand too. You can pick the 120-300 up from here for arounf £1000 at the moment, you won't get a Nikon 300 F2.8 for under 2k secondhand. Mifsuds have an AFS one (not vr) for £2299 and a non AFS for £1500, but then you are compromissing on focussing speed.
 
Ross_Evans said:
I have 2 bodies, but just using the 70-200 at the moment, that's why i feel i need to invest in the 400mm, but obviously the price is very high!!
Unfortunately the games i cover only allow me to sit behind the goal so i miss most of the action at the other end!!
Click to expand...

Whereabouts in Bexley are you Ross?

Nikon or Canon? *EDIT* Sorry - see you mentioned the Nikon 400 so assume you are a nikon user....
 
Ross_Evans said:
I'm starting out in Footy photography and have been advised that the Nikon 400mm f2.8 would be an ideal lens?

Has anybody used one?

I know they are pricey brand new and seem very hard to come by second hand!!

I welcome all help and advice!!
Click to expand...



May I also suggest you look at the 200-400mm Nikon, the best zoom currently avalible and super sharp ! gives you the best of both short and long. Good luck :thumbs:
 
I know it well Ross, I live is Sidcup, and my son trains at Dartford swimming club, so drive through the village on the way to swimming 3 or 4 times a week.

If you have an interest in the Sigma 120-300 More than happy to meet up and you can have a play with mine (so to speak :D:D).

I did have it up for sale but have decided to keep it now, as the lens I was after has been sold anyway. It might help you make up your mind one way or the other.
 
I have spent far too many nights in the village lol

Thanks Barney, but i think i am set on the 400mm..............i just have to find a second hand cheap enough now!!

Is your photography purely for leisure or do you work at it full time!!
 
Bit of both to be honest.

I work up in town during the day - unfortunately more lucrative but also more boring than Togging.
 
If anyone hears of a 400mm going please let me know!!

Thanks for the comments and advice so far!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top