Nikon Gear - Sports 400mm

toohuge said:
For lenses of that value, the usual MPB, WEX, LCE etc.

With that said, be mindful of the lens you buy. Many of them are out of service by Nikon and parts are impossible to source. You may end up with the paper weight at some point, regardless of store warranty etc.
Click to expand...
Thanks Bud! I've been looking on these sites and they're obviously good however, the prices are crazy haha! I'll see what I can find soon.

I'd need to get a new work horse body too so I'm not just using my D500. What do you think of Sony for sports?
 
JustJackPhotography said:
Thanks Bud! I've been looking on these sites and they're obviously good however, the prices are crazy haha! I'll see what I can find soon.

I'd need to get a new work horse body too so I'm not just using my D500. What do you think of Sony for sports?
Click to expand...
In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with the D500 / D5 for sports. Pair either of those with the 70-200 fl-e and they are incredibly difficult to beat.... I've not shot a modern 400 2.8 on those bodies.

Sony for sports - again very capable, but once you have a capable body, it's much more about the photographer than the equipment - not a popular opinion....

For context, I use both a D5 and a 1DXii for sports, there's very, very little in it... in fact, I'd go as far to say, there's nothing in it. Both incredibly capable, the Nikon 70-200 fl-e is imo the best I've ever used and the 200 f/2 from Nikon is simply epic - I've not used the canon 200 f/2 and I'm not sure it can physically focus as fast as the Nikon - barely anything focuses like that lens does. I have used a Sony A7Riii and A7Riv both good, however, both of those are not as fast to use the others.

I don't think those sites are too pricey, if you compare the used prices things on this forum sell for and to a certain extent, eBay too, those other sites seem pretty reasonable, especially with the peace of mind of a warranty etc.

In all seriousness, what are you hoping to photograph and how often? Also, how much do you anticipate on earning from these images? I have a 400 2.8 that I rarely use, it's a nice thing to have, and I'd like to add a 600 f4 at some point.... That said, I barely use it haha. If I needed the very latest and best, I'd simply rent a 400 2.8 for the occasions that I would actually need it, then always get the latest version and send it back to not absorb the huge capital cost and associated depreciation.
 
toohuge said:
In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with the D500 / D5 for sports. Pair either of those with the 70-200 fl-e and they are incredibly difficult to beat.... I've not shot a modern 400 2.8 on those bodies.

Sony for sports - again very capable, but once you have a capable body, it's much more about the photographer than the equipment - not a popular opinion....

For context, I use both a D5 and a 1DXii for sports, there's very, very little in it... in fact, I'd go as far to say, there's nothing in it. Both incredibly capable, the Nikon 70-200 fl-e is imo the best I've ever used and the 200 f/2 from Nikon is simply epic - I've not used the canon 200 f/2 and I'm not sure it can physically focus as fast as the Nikon - barely anything focuses like that lens does. I have used a Sony A7Riii and A7Riv both good, however, both of those are not as fast to use the others.

I don't think those sites are too pricey, if you compare the used prices things on this forum sell for and to a certain extent, eBay too, those other sites seem pretty reasonable, especially with the peace of mind of a warranty etc.

In all seriousness, what are you hoping to photograph and how often? Also, how much do you anticipate on earning from these images? I have a 400 2.8 that I rarely use, it's a nice thing to have, and I'd like to add a 600 f4 at some point.... That said, I barely use it haha. If I needed the very latest and best, I'd simply rent a 400 2.8 for the occasions that I would actually need it, then always get the latest version and send it back to not absorb the huge capital cost and associated depreciation.
Click to expand...

Comment about capable gear is spot on. The one thing I'd add is that A7r bodies are not designed for sports, and an A9 would likely have performed much better, allowing the tog to concentrate on pictures.
 
toohuge said:
In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with the D500 / D5 for sports. Pair either of those with the 70-200 fl-e and they are incredibly difficult to beat.... I've not shot a modern 400 2.8 on those bodies.

Sony for sports - again very capable, but once you have a capable body, it's much more about the photographer than the equipment - not a popular opinion....

For context, I use both a D5 and a 1DXii for sports, there's very, very little in it... in fact, I'd go as far to say, there's nothing in it. Both incredibly capable, the Nikon 70-200 fl-e is imo the best I've ever used and the 200 f/2 from Nikon is simply epic - I've not used the canon 200 f/2 and I'm not sure it can physically focus as fast as the Nikon - barely anything focuses like that lens does. I have used a Sony A7Riii and A7Riv both good, however, both of those are not as fast to use the others.

I don't think those sites are too pricey, if you compare the used prices things on this forum sell for and to a certain extent, eBay too, those other sites seem pretty reasonable, especially with the peace of mind of a warranty etc.

In all seriousness, what are you hoping to photograph and how often? Also, how much do you anticipate on earning from these images? I have a 400 2.8 that I rarely use, it's a nice thing to have, and I'd like to add a 600 f4 at some point.... That said, I barely use it haha. If I needed the very latest and best, I'd simply rent a 400 2.8 for the occasions that I would actually need it, then always get the latest version and send it back to not absorb the huge capital cost and associated depreciation.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the late reply bud! Busy week!

So I shoot regularly for a Rugby team "Beckenham RFC" and I get paid for every game I shoot. I literally shoot every weekend and also sometimes twice a weekend If I get the ladies teams asking for a Sunday shoot. Where is best to rent a 400mm 2.8 lens though? That's really the only thing I would require I believe to step up my photography.

My only concern with only having the 70-200 is that I get to half way (JUST) and when the action isn't near the try line I get no shots for a good 10/15 minutes and miss a lot of nice crunching tackles up the field. I would love to just rent a 400mm lens here and there when obviously I could and then just buy myself a 2nd body second hand and just use it when needed.
 
JustJackPhotography said:
Sorry for the late reply bud! Busy week!

So I shoot regularly for a Rugby team "Beckenham RFC" and I get paid for every game I shoot. I literally shoot every weekend and also sometimes twice a weekend If I get the ladies teams asking for a Sunday shoot. Where is best to rent a 400mm 2.8 lens though? That's really the only thing I would require I believe to step up my photography.

My only concern with only having the 70-200 is that I get to half way (JUST) and when the action isn't near the try line I get no shots for a good 10/15 minutes and miss a lot of nice crunching tackles up the field. I would love to just rent a 400mm lens here and there when obviously I could and then just buy myself a 2nd body second hand and just use it when needed.
Click to expand...
Yep - you need a 400 2.8.
I’ve always had great dealings with wex rental in the past. I understand what you mean by the 70-200 being too short.
 
toohuge said:
Yep - you need a 400 2.8.
I’ve always had great dealings with wex rental in the past. I understand what you mean by the 70-200 being too short.
Click to expand...
I think I'm going to rent a new body and 400mm lens just to check them out. Get a few shots and then see what I'm thinking about buying.

What do you think would be easier to find in a decent 2nd hand condition a Canon 1DXii with a nice 400mm or going for a D5 with a 400mm Nikon?
 
JustJackPhotography said:
I think I'm going to rent a new body and 400mm lens just to check them out. Get a few shots and then see what I'm thinking about buying.

What do you think would be easier to find in a decent 2nd hand condition a Canon 1DXii with a nice 400mm or going for a D5 with a 400mm Nikon?
Click to expand...
In all honesty, it's very difficult to say. I believe it would be easier to find a 1dxii than a D5, D5's really hold their value.... I have both (I have a problem haha) and there's very little in it, but I personally believe the D5 has better AF for sport. It's close mind, and the 1dxii at 14 fps does feel like to gets out the hole faster, but with more af errors, what's the point? I usually have both my cameras set at 10 fps as it is, the faster rates are cool and all, but just give you a load more images to trawl through at the end. Both are seemingly bufferless.

My concern over the 400 2.8's is serviceability. Unfortunately, both Canon and Nikon released their 'updated' versions of these relatively recently, with Canon you're at IS III and with Nikon it's the FL VR series of lenses. These are both very rare and super expensive. There are numerous older versions of these lenses available, but serviceability is going to be an issue. I'd not want to spend circa. 3k on a lens and have it become a paperweight in the future.

If you are looking at older gear, there will be more Canon gear out there as their professional market share is that much greater. Remember though, a lot of these 400 2.8's will likely be agency lenses and have had a hard life.

If you're renting equipment, there's little point on putting the 400 on a full frame camera, if you have a D500 already.... I'd be tempted to put the 400 on the D500 and if you rent another body, put a hot 70-200 on that to maximise the wider opportunities. The difference in field of view of a 70-200 on a D500 and a 400 on FF wont be huge.
 
toohuge said:
In all honesty, it's very difficult to say. I believe it would be easier to find a 1dxii than a D5, D5's really hold their value.... I have both (I have a problem haha) and there's very little in it, but I personally believe the D5 has better AF for sport. It's close mind, and the 1dxii at 14 fps does feel like to gets out the hole faster, but with more af errors, what's the point? I usually have both my cameras set at 10 fps as it is, the faster rates are cool and all, but just give you a load more images to trawl through at the end. Both are seemingly bufferless.

My concern over the 400 2.8's is serviceability. Unfortunately, both Canon and Nikon released their 'updated' versions of these relatively recently, with Canon you're at IS III and with Nikon it's the FL VR series of lenses. These are both very rare and super expensive. There are numerous older versions of these lenses available, but serviceability is going to be an issue. I'd not want to spend circa. 3k on a lens and have it become a paperweight in the future.

If you are looking at older gear, there will be more Canon gear out there as their professional market share is that much greater. Remember though, a lot of these 400 2.8's will likely be agency lenses and have had a hard life.

If you're renting equipment, there's little point on putting the 400 on a full frame camera, if you have a D500 already.... I'd be tempted to put the 400 on the D500 and if you rent another body, put a hot 70-200 on that to maximise the wider opportunities. The difference in field of view of a 70-200 on a D500 and a 400 on FF wont be huge.
Click to expand...
This right here is a bit of key information and I really appreciate it! The D5 was always on my list of upgrades.

What you said about the D500 going onto the 400 mm was literally what I was thinking of doing and having the full frame capability of the D5 on my 70-200 I feel would put the lens to better use!

Again, really appreciate the help and I think for now, my thought process is to either buy a D5 body 2nd hand see what sort of deals I can get (I'm an avid Nikon user so would feel comfortable with it) Then most probably use Wex or another rental place to rent the 400mm on like an every other weekend basis until I find a good 2nd hand version to buy :) This will just open up my opportunities and really make me appreciate the other half of the pitch when shooting :D

Thanks again!
 
JustJackPhotography said:
This right here is a bit of key information and I really appreciate it! The D5 was always on my list of upgrades.

What you said about the D500 going onto the 400 mm was literally what I was thinking of doing and having the full frame capability of the D5 on my 70-200 I feel would put the lens to better use!

Again, really appreciate the help and I think for now, my thought process is to either buy a D5 body 2nd hand see what sort of deals I can get (I'm an avid Nikon user so would feel comfortable with it) Then most probably use Wex or another rental place to rent the 400mm on like an every other weekend basis until I find a good 2nd hand version to buy :) This will just open up my opportunities and really make me appreciate the other half of the pitch when shooting :D

Thanks again!
Click to expand...
You're very welcome. The D5 is awesome, I love mine. It's a huge step forward over what I was using.

Where are you based? I'm based at Loughborough... if we're close by, I'm happy to come down with the D5 and the 70-200 fl-e for you to try out.
Chris
 
toohuge said:
You're very welcome. The D5 is awesome, I love mine. It's a huge step forward over what I was using.

Where are you based? I'm based at Loughborough... if we're close by, I'm happy to come down with the D5 and the 70-200 fl-e for you to try out.
Chris
Click to expand...
I'm based in Kent, so I usually shoot through the London 2 SE leagues. Some great rugby this year however, when I do have a week off I'd be happy to come up that way to shoot!

Jack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top