Which nikon budget zoom for rugby

G

Gwaelod

Messages
55
Name
Arwyn
Edit My Images
Yes
Want to start shooting some rugby pics from touchline with my d40. is a Nikon 55-200 going to be long enough..or am i better off getting the nikon 70-300Vr. Is it worth considering the sigma 70-300mm? Budget is tight..I have f2.8 ideas but f5.6 pockets, but i'd be gutted if I bought a lens that was too short or soft. Any opinions appreciated.....thanks.
 
Thanks lads (dusts off credit card). I thought/feared that would be the consensus ;-)
 
This question interests me also.

55-200 VR or 70-300 VR for Nikon D40?

Can someone post (or point me to) shots taken at say 50, 200, 300 on a 1.6 crop to get an idea of the zoom power?

Used to a 70-200 on a 35mm, so just wondering how much more closer one can get with potentially a 300mm or so with the 55-200mm and 450mm with the 300?
 
jaffamuffin said:
This question interests me also.

55-200 VR or 70-300 VR for Nikon D40?

Can someone post (or point me to) shots taken at say 50, 200, 300 on a 1.6 crop to get an idea of the zoom power?

Used to a 70-200 on a 35mm, so just wondering how much more closer one can get with potentially a 300mm or so with the 55-200mm and 450mm with the 300?
Click to expand...


Not a great good shot, but here is 200mm on an 18-200 VR against 300mm on the 70-300 VR

3067399960_df426ea226.jpg
 
Hmm. just realised it's a 'FX' lens as well. The 55-200 is a DX. The DX lens wouldn't work so well on a 35mm camera would it?

What Nikon film camera would be suitable to use the 70-300 lens with, given it's a G lens with no aperture control ring.

Looking to get a Nikon film body to allow lens swapping to get more out my glass.
 
jaffamuffin said:
Hmm. just realised it's a 'FX' lens as well. The 55-200 is a DX. The DX lens wouldn't work so well on a 35mm camera would it?

What Nikon film camera would be suitable to use the 70-300 lens with, given it's a G lens with no aperture control ring.

Looking to get a Nikon film body to allow lens swapping to get more out my glass.
Click to expand...


Watch the later entry-level Nikon film bodies some (iirc) don't work with AF-S lenses. I'm sure someone with more knowledge on the subject than me (ie most people :LOL:) will be able to confirm if this is the case
 
I've just checked my 70-300 on an F65 and an F80 - AF and VR work fine on both.

IIRC, Dx lenses will WORK on film bodies but will vignette a lot. Not got any Dx lenses here at the moment to check though.
 
Gwaelod said:
Want to start shooting some rugby pics from touchline with my d40. is a Nikon 55-200 going to be long enough..or am i better off getting the nikon 70-300Vr. Is it worth considering the sigma 70-300mm? Budget is tight..I have f2.8 ideas but f5.6 pockets, but i'd be gutted if I bought a lens that was too short or soft. Any opinions appreciated.....thanks.
Click to expand...

I've used the 55-200 and the 70-300 Nikons for rugby. You can go to my fotopic site :))) for examples if you like. The 55-200 is much, much lighter and has a better balance on the camera body.

I did consider the Sigma but the cheaper version doesn't AF on a D40 and nobody but nobody had the version that did in stock -- or the ability if ordering online to guarantee they were sending me the right one. (That may have changed - I could just have had bad luck).

You can get a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM for £640. If I had my time again I'd wait a bit longer and go for that one. 200mm on a 1.5x crop is more than enough for decent coverage and you need the light more than the length in the winter (although obviously having 450mm equivalent does mean you chase the action a little less when the light's right in the summer).
 
If your on a tight budget there is a Nikon 55-200mm for sale on this forum for £80 HERE not the VR version though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top