300 or 400? f2.8

[jeffreyluce]

I'm at work lusting over new lenses.... I would love to do more sports photography and concert photography.

Which would you recommend? The 300mm or 400mm lens for sports & concert work.

[RandySmith]

Jeffrey,

I heard a great line last night .......

"There are Astronomers and Astronauts ... "The astronomers view and wish they could be part of the stars, the astronauts, become part ... "

So I am also wishing for a long telephoto so I can at least get close to the "stars" on the fields ... however, the budget limitations are keeping me at bay ...

all this being said, my choice would be the 400 f2.8

Randy

[PeteQ]

No easy answer here... What sports? What kind of access do you have as far as being able to position yourself? Day or night games? Etc. ad nauseum...

I have the 400 along with my trusted 70-200 for sports and there are times when the 400 is too long and I wish I had a 300/2.8. Of course I can usually position myself back a few steps, but if you are going to be fighting for space, once you move your feet, you lose your seat.

There is a huge jump from f4 to f2.8 when it comes to night football and every ounce of light you can get is worth it's price. A 300 with good sideline access would do great for football as you can move about and not be too awful tight shooting from the sides to the middle of the field. With the 400 I like to (and sometimes have to) be able to shoot from the end zones. Better chance of getting some faces also...

Daytime is not so much a problem as the Nikon 70-200 handles the 1.4x TC very well and the 1.7x TC pretty well and they get me into that 300mm range at f4 or thereabouts. It's only really at night or indoors when I get antsy for the 300/2.8.

The 300 is a very versatile sports lens IMO. Nice length for basketball and other indoor sports where the 400 would be just to darn tight. I love my 400 but am looking for a nice used 300 as I have a boat load of indoor stuff lined up for the spring....

And of course...what's your budget?

Good luck!

[jeffreyluce]

I would go for the 2.8 versions w/ IS of these lenses.... I am fortunately an overpaid programmer - so I have some extra money to feed my habit.... so I want to get the best lenses I can... if that means saving a few months (or years) I'll do that.

I would just hate to get the 300... and think..."Man, I should have gotten the 400", or vice versa.

Just curious what other people use / their opinions.

[PeteQ]

You will always think "Man I should have gotten that (insert something else here)...." when what you have doesn't fill the bill perfectly.

If you shoot a lot of sports and have the money to support the habit, you will end up with both at some point down the line.

[jeffreyluce]

Originally Posted by PeteQ

You will always think "Man I should have gotten that (insert something else here)...."

Sooooo true.... sooooo true.

[jeffkohn]

What type of concerts are you wanting to shoot that you think you'd want to use a 300mm or 400mm lens? I've found the 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 to be my most useful lenses, although if the lighting is really good or you're willing to bump ISO high enough a 70-200 with stabilization might also be good. But 300 2.8 or 400 2.8 would be far too bulky and awkward for shooting from the crowd (at leat at the concerts I go to), and far too long for shooting from the pit if you have credentials. Getting a shake-free image at that focal lenght is also going to be very difficult, even with stabilization.

[jeffreyluce]

I was at a concert at my church... to which I shot from the sides and back of the room. I had a 70-200 f2.8 IS, which did great for full body shots of the members if they were standing, but was a bit lacking if I wanted a face shot.

I guess I like to "sit back" and see what is going on.... but good point... if you are up close these lenses would be useless. I have the 50 f1.4, which would work for the pit.

[Abel]

also on a side note... some of the major concerts like U2 etc only allow photogs to shoot from back by the sound board so a 300-400 can come in handy in those high profile concerts. but then again those are pretty far and few between.

best i can judge if i had the option of one or the other, id prolly go for the 300 simply for the fact that i would be able to use it while shooting basketball where the 400 would be a bit too long as well as a bit too heavy.

a 300 f2.8 is also great for football... plus then you could always add a 1.4x TC and make it a 420 f4 which for outdoors football (bright light) is also very managable...

best thing to do is to sit down and weigh out the options as far and what you really intend to shoot etc. then do a bit more research as to what others shoot with etc and then make an assement.

is hard to work a 400 in a smaller environment (basketball for example) but a 300 can easily adapt to a large environment like football.

Best Advice:
Since youre in Plano... hit up Lighttec and go out and rent both a 300 and a 400 for a weekend and play around with them and see which best fits you... It may only cost about $110 or so but that will defnintely convince you which option is the best for you. Cant beat that!