Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource
  

FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest

  
 
PureMichigan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


Guys, I rented a 400MM 2.8 a few times last year. I'm going to take the plunge and buy one this year as I'll be doing more D2 college this fall.

This is not a Cannon/Nikon question -- it's a question of how far back in the lens line is it advisable to go with a lens of this type.

Like many of you, I turn off VR/IS for football. The difference in price between the non-VR/IS lenses and the preceding generation (AF but no VR) is often in the $2,000-3,000 range.

Does the quality./speed of the newer VR/IF lenses justify that additional cost. Or, all other things being equal are the non-VR/IS lenses "just as good?"

Obviously newer is typically better -- but is it $3,000 better?

Thoughts/Opinions/Insights. Thanks!



Feb 22, 2016 at 09:21 AM
mikekeating
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


Hi MI,

I went through this internal debate last year. I wound up getting a Nikon 400mm F2.8 AF-S ED (non-VR) used. I actually found it on the Amazon marketplace (got the amazon protections going that route) and it was an amazing deal.

It is probably a good decade old (if I was to guess) but it looks new. Guy was meticulous about his gear and was selling as his kids are done with sports (like I will be selling mine when they are done).

I have not found myself missing any shots (due to the lens-the guy carrying it . . .thats another story) because of speed.

Bottomline, I could not justify the additional money, but I am not making my living from the lens . . .I am just making enough to buy the gear . . .and the kids sports gear. . .



Feb 22, 2016 at 10:16 AM
Trevorma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I think IMHO that it boils down to the return on investment.

If you are making your living with the lens then I would get the latest greatest lens, and fire away. If you make enough to buy some nice gear but not support a living you might want to look at the older VR, or even the AFS versions.

If this is a hobby and hoping to make it big...... keep renting.



Feb 22, 2016 at 10:19 AM
FaulknersFoto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I think it makes a difference if we know which system you are using. I can't speak to Nikon, but I have the very first Canon 400 2.8L. It's relatively sharp when it's in focus and the focus is fast and mostly accurate with microadjustments made, but it pales in comparison to the latest and greatest. If I were to purchase again I would not get the first model ever. The second is supposedly much sharper and I have used both IS models (and have severe envy). For web and/or newsprint, even the older models will be ok if you add some sharpening. If you want real image quality, spend the extra money and get the non-IS II at a minimum (or the first IS model as it's dropped in price to about 4k). In my opinion, the image difference (and the weight difference) is worth at least 1k.


Feb 22, 2016 at 12:00 PM
JMDobson
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I made the leap and bought the Nikon 400 2.8 VR back in the fall. I work for a small daily paper, and this bit a huge chunk out of my salary, but I sprung for the VR version over the DII because I wanted the reassurance that the AF motor was going to last longer and parts will be available longer. I doubt I would be able to tell a difference in the final images, but I plan on using this lens until it dies, so the extra $1-2k bought me a few years of autofocus.


Feb 22, 2016 at 02:47 PM
John Skinner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I own a mixed bag here of long glass.

300 2.8 Non-VR
400 2.8 Non-VR
200-400 f/4 VRII

I would have gone the 200-400 with no VR had it been available. I can see where some people will need this feature if you had a myriad of event types to cover, never know where or when you had to pull long glass. But in my personal case, it's always sports.

That being said, sports is one of those things where shutter speed and DOF mean the difference between a keeper and scrap. For this I rely on ISO, and a fixed aperture PERIOD. And when I've on occasion shot nature with any of the above, I've adjusted my shooting style to accommodate the glass (eg) gimble head/ tripod etc..

So as much as it's helpful, it's also kind of a waste of dosh in my eyes. If these pieces were ALL under the 3K ceiling ! Yea buddy ! I'd have VR everything (why not). But being prices -- especially for the 400 are so high. You have a call to make on the type and images you'll need to produce.



Feb 22, 2016 at 03:47 PM
PureMichigan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


Great insights, as always. Thanks guys. I clearly hadn't given enough thought to the long-term maintenance and reparability issues. Given the age of my kids and the D2 college MiLB work I will be doing, I would ideally own this lens for a minimum of 10 years (hence buy vs. rent).

The Nikon 400MM AFS-II was available 2001-07; so it’s 8-15 years old from the outset. Not sure how it—or any lens – will perform after at 18-25 year of service: it’s a $6,000 crap shoot. But I think it’s wise to factor a repair or at least maintenance into the equation given time span and use.

Going the first generation VR route saves 7 years on both ends of that time frame for about ~$1,500 more. I'm leaning that way at this point.

Again, thanks for the help.



Feb 23, 2016 at 10:00 AM
rassilon
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


A 400mm makes a world of difference depending on the subject matter you are covering.


Feb 23, 2016 at 11:09 AM
Trevorma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


The other thing to look at is the tax benefit or lack there of from each lens.

I am not familiar with the Michigan Tax laws but amortization, interest on loans ect and whether or not they are tax write-offs could be a consideration as well.

Repairs can also be something that is a tax benefit, however if the lens is old to the point there is no repair available that would not be a benefit at all.



Feb 23, 2016 at 11:12 AM
Weasel_Loader
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I own a really nice Nikon 300/2.8 AF-S II and love it to death. Don't need VR for 99% of stuff I've shot. The only thing that would compel me to purchase the newer versions is the coatings. I have at times lost a lot of contrast when shooting into the sun or get just enough light onto the lens which kills a good image. I would love to see how much of a difference the newest coatings deal with sunlight hitting the glass.


Feb 23, 2016 at 02:52 PM
leewoolery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


To be safe, I'd contact Nikon to see what the service span is for the lenses you are looking at.

Also...if you are not a member of NPS, join so you have the benefit of a loaner in case your lens has to go in for repairs.

The newer versions of the 400 f/2.8 focus faster, are sharper and much lighter to carry around all day.

Good luck with your new purchase,



Feb 23, 2016 at 03:18 PM
MichGoBlue
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


I have contacted Nikon and they told me that they no longer service the AFS II lenses. This was in the last 6 months or so. In addition, the newest TC 1.4 III doesn't work with the AFS II lenses - you need at least a VR I for the AF to work apparently (have not tested but that's what the compatibility sheets I have seen say).

I have a 400 2.8 AFS II and had a 300 2.8 AFS II and love them both. That said, if I were buying a 400 or 300 now I would get the VR I version for the above reasons.



Feb 24, 2016 at 01:36 PM
PureMichigan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


That's great to know. Thanks. It makes my decision much easier, especially given the time horizon I would hope to own/use the lens.

But now I need to go check the Powerball jackpot....



Feb 24, 2016 at 02:15 PM
MichGoBlue
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


3rd party shops can and do still work on these lenses. The issue is that Nikon may no longer be manufacturing parts for the AFS II lenses - I don't know if that is the case though as the AF motor is very similar to that in the VR lenses.


Feb 26, 2016 at 03:10 PM
gene2632
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


If you are looking at a 10 year time line go with the latest because with the older ones become it becomes hard to find repair service and parts. I owned my original Canon 400 2.8 Non-IS series 1 for 17 years. It was a great lens, I made a lot of money with it but in the end I sold it because it was becoming harder and harder to get is serviced and regular maintenance on this stuff in important. I upgraded to the IS series 1 before the Series 2 came out and kept that until I retired last spring.


Feb 27, 2016 at 02:01 PM
finster1018
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


this should be a no brainer but really, I would try to keep within my means. I don't see how buying the latest is going to benefit you if it either puts you in debt or makes your broke. If you can manage it, get the non-IS version (gently) used and when you feel that you should make the jump to the IS version, sell the non-IS towards the purchase of the IS version. Do things in steps and maybe the money you earn from using the NON-IS lens will help you to purchase a new one without the additional out-of-pocket dollars. Lenses tend to hold their value (relative to cameras) so you should be able to get out of it what you nearly put into it as long as the glass is clean and the autofocus works.


Mar 25, 2016 at 12:05 PM
Focus Locus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Stepping up to a 400MM 2.8: Value of Buying the Latest


PureMichigan... You said this is not a Canon/Nikon question, and didn't mention which brand you had, but on the Canon... there is a built in protective front element in the IS version before the current version that the latest version doesn't have (the absence of which help makes the more recent version lighter).

I read that this protective front element is much cheaper to replace in the event of a ball break or scuff without a hood on, than in the newer version where the front element is actually part of the optical formula, as opposed to optically neutral like the former version.

Just another thing to consider that I did not see mentioned yet.



Apr 14, 2016 at 12:56 AM





FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.