Bobbo Clark Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Hey, all. Long time, no see. I used to post here frequently about (oh, god... THAT long?) 8 years ago when I was in college and shooting sports. Work took me away from shooting sports (and, well, pretty much anything), but now I'm freelancing for a local paper just for poops and giggles (and the tax write-off of equipment purchases, lol).
Anywho, I've been thinking of upgrading my long lens for field sports/baseball after a year of shooting. I'm using a D7100 with a 300/4 AF (yes, the original one with the slow focus and the drop-in filter but best-ever focus limiter), but I'd like something with a 2.8 for when I get called to shoot football and night baseball. Also, the smaller DOF would be nice, as well. Obscenely faster AF isn't all that important to me (I've shot dozens of games with the above combo, and focusing speed is rarely the issue when I, yes, I, screw up), but a bit faster would be fine.
But I'm freelancing for a small paper, so no new VR lenses for this guy. Actually, no new anything. So I've set a limit of under $2K for the purchase.
I'm looking at three choices:
1) An original 300/2.8 AF or AF-I;
2) A Sigma/Tamron/Tokina 300/2.8 of whatever variety will actually work on my camera;
or
3) A Sigma 120-300/2.8 of the non-OS variety.
So, "gun to your head," what would you pick and why? Anything I should definitely stay away from?
...and GO.
Thanks,
--Bobbo
|