Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource
  

FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2016 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses

  
 
RSHPhotography
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


Trying not start a war here.

Here's my problem. I'm a wedding shooter who is slowly moving away to motorsports and baseball.

I have a D700 gripped, which gives me 8fps with Full frame. Very happy with it. But i'll probably upgrade to the D4s or 1DX this summer.

Lenses.... this is my problem.

All and I mean ALL of my friends who helping me out with gigs are Canon shooters. I cannot use their lens with my camera body.

So I need to make a decision: Stick to Nikon and start investing in 300mm 2.8 with teleconverter, or move to Canon with their 300mm and their teleconverter.

Nikon also has a very affordable 200-400 in comparison to Canon. Althought I'll probably stick to primes.

The vast majority of my experience shooting sports have been with borrowed/rented Canon gear, and I frankly loved it.

Now the question is for those who have switched or use both, would you say Canon glass, focus speed etc... is a better buy than the Nikon variant, or is it so close it doesn't matter?

I'm not comparing 20 year old gear, talking about the latest L lenses vs the VR1 or VR2 big glass.

Any help will be appreciated.



Apr 30, 2016 at 03:50 PM
Dragonfire
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


Canon always seems to have more inventory in stores and you rarely see "backorder" for gear on the market a year or longer.

Nikon does not have the depth or the breath in the inventory department.

Pro bodies and super-telephotos equally great.

Have a great time.

BTW - I shoot Canon because the Nikon was out-of-stock when I started.



Apr 30, 2016 at 05:00 PM
P Alesse
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


So close that it doesn't matter but I will say this... in terms of using your gear for portraiture in addition to sports action, Nikon beats Canon when it comes to color pop, noise, and DR. I have shot both and have employed shooters from both camps and Nikon beatd Canon everytime on those criteria points.


Apr 30, 2016 at 07:20 PM
PureMichigan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


I'm a wedding shooter who is slowly moving away to motorsports and baseball.

So you are giving up profit for fun?



Apr 30, 2016 at 09:06 PM
RSHPhotography
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


PureMichigan wrote:
I'm a wedding shooter who is slowly moving away to motorsports and baseball.

So you are giving up profit for fun?


You have to do what makes you happy. I have a day job. I'm a semi-pro.




Apr 30, 2016 at 11:32 PM
FaulknersFoto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


As far as I know, there's little to no difference between Canon and Nikon when it comes to their big glass. If you already have professional lenses (like a 70-200 2.8) it will cost you more money to switch than it is worth. I'd say stick with what you know and save some cash doing so.


May 01, 2016 at 12:20 AM
DejanS
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


Why switch unless you just want to? Ask yourself this: will you be a better sports photographer with a white tele lens or a black one? Use what you have, invest in more Nikon gear and market yourself for more gigs rather than banging your head and wasting time in this ridiculous debate. ;-)

Dejan



May 01, 2016 at 01:53 PM
amlsml
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


Good advice here. I shot both Canon and Nikon and stayed with Nikon. The D3s simply is amazing and very affordable. It does High ISO sports, like ice Hockey and Basketball very well. The deciding factor is the 200-400 F4 Nikon version 1 or 2, is hard to beat on field sports during the day. I use it 95% of the time for Baseball , Lacrosse, Tennis, Golf, Football, and Track. The Canon counterpart will cost you so much more, I don't see the economic value. Now with the D500, the 200-400 has even more reach. I have owned and shot thousands of frames with the Canon and Nikon , 300 2.8 and the 400 2.8, All are superb and have their differences, but in practice they all shine. Any NFL sideline will have as many Nikon as Canon Shooters so the quality is in both systems, it is up to the shooter. I also like that my old nikon MF len's work with my cameras. There is a beauty to shooting with a 30-40 year old lens, that cost a fraction of what they did when new. You can buy a Used D3S and a 200-400 ver 1 on these boards, shoot it for a season then sell it for not much less than if you rented it. You may even walk away cost neutral. Good luck and have fun!


May 01, 2016 at 08:18 PM
Stripper
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


This is a money thing. The new long Nikon Fluorite lenses are lighter and better but the 200-400 Canon is better. Truth to tell...just like everybody else says, the gear is so close that nobody is going to pay more for photos taken with one or the other.

You need to put it on a spreadsheet and see where the money is. The money is not in shooting mortorsport...that is for sure.

JohnCote



May 01, 2016 at 09:04 PM
phototoronto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


I shoot Nikon and wish they released a new 200-400 f4 with built in TC


May 02, 2016 at 09:26 AM
calvinm
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


I am a staff photographer with the Ohio University Athletics Department. The department has a selection of Nikon kit which I have used extensively over the past three years. If you are looking for image quality I highly suggest Nikon because Nikon renders colors and skin tones much better than Canon. However, Nikon lacks in autofocus performance. I have found that Canon autofocus is much more reliable than Nikon in regards to locking focus and tracking. In regards to lenses Nikon is heavier but the brands are equally sharp.

Here is a recent gallery: http://www.ohiobobcats.com/view.gal?id=193949



May 02, 2016 at 10:20 AM
RSHPhotography
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


phototoronto wrote:
I shoot Nikon and wish they released a new 200-400 f4 with built in TC


If they did, it would probably be 50 gazzillion like Canon's. I've only used this lens at trade shows, but it is superb and the TC is as advertised.

Would be nice if both companies incorporated a 1.4 TC with newer prime lenses.




May 02, 2016 at 10:36 AM
leewoolery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


I shoot with both Nikon and Canon systems and the latest 300 mm f.2.8 lenses from both are excellent...with 1.4 teleconverters attached as well.

The AF, sharpness, contrast and handling are equally impressive.

The key is using pro caliber bodies so that means D3, D3s, D4, D4s D5 for Nikon or 1Dx or 1Dx Mark II for Canon to get the best from each combo.

The AF, high ISO performance, color and handling of the D4s and 1Dx are quite remarkable and the D5 and 1Dx Mark II will be even better so you can't go wrong with either company's flagship camera.

Since you already have Nikon gear, I would opt for not switching to Canon to save some money.

The Nikon 200-400 f/4 is a lens that you need to rent for a weekend and see the results for yourself. For daytime softball and baseball, the zoom capability is invaluable.

I use the 1Dx for nearly all of my family, senior and business portraits, weddings, team photo days and action but a D4s or D5 would also do an excellent job.

The D3 will still work as a multi-use camera body.

Attached are examples of images taken with both 300's with and without 1.4 teleconverters and the 200-400.

Good luck with your decision,



© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo




May 02, 2016 at 12:08 PM
leewoolery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


The D700 with grip and D3 battery is still quite a capable camera body and I still use mine.

I would stick to Nikon so you don't have to find an equivalent Canon back-up body.

Here are more images taken with the Nikon 200-400 V II.

It's an affordable, very sharp and versatile lens that has to be taken seriously for daytime field sports.

I use the 400 f/2.8 for baseball, softball, soccer, track and field, tennis and football during daytime and under the lights but being able to hand-hold a 300 f/2.8 is sure alot easier for an all-day event or if you want to travel light!

Good luck with your decision.



© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo




May 02, 2016 at 02:11 PM
Focus Locus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


It goes back and forth all the time. One year Nikon will have glass that Canon doesn't have. A few years later, Canon will have glass that Nikon doesn't have. I remember when Nikon had the only 200-400 f/4... Canon didn't even make one. I remember when Canon had the first and only lenses with Image Stabilization (in the 90's). I remember when Nikon had the only prime quality ultra wide zoom. I remember when Canon had 45 focus points (1V), versus Nikon's 5 (F5). I remember lots of sports photographers switching to Canon in the 90's. Ten years later, in the mid 2000's, lot's of sports photographers switched back to Nikon. The entire staff of USA Today even made the switch. Ten years later again, people have been switching back to Canon for various reasons.

It will likely always be this way. I do agree with the straight out of camera color assessments between Nikon (warmer, more amber, and smoother skin tones) versus Canon (crisper, colder, more saturated, and redder skin tones)... but obviously these factory default color renderings can be adjusted in camera as well as in post.

If shopping based on body, and the primary work is sports action, I'd be inclined to pick based on autofocus performance. I would not have said this 20 years ago, because 20 years ago, the kinds of shots taken then (that we take for granted today) were the result of years of experience covering a sport, zone focus, manual follow focus, and a good bit of luck. But as the quality and capability of the equipment has improved, so has the standards and expectations. To keep up with those expectations, there is benefit to having the most reliably proven new technology. And since cameras are now computers, that will change on an annual basis, following Moore's law.

But if shopping based on lenses, which is the OP's thread title... I'd just run with what you brung. The glass isn't cleaner on the other side. A new law has become the paradigm... the lighter the big glass, the lighter the big wallet after acquisition. All of my telephotos are at least a decade old, and one is almost two decades old. The heavier weight of the glass is ballasted by the heavier weight of the wallet on the back side.



May 03, 2016 at 03:08 PM
mphocus
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


I shoot Nikon and in my opinion they both do a great job. Canon has pros over Nikon and likewise Nikon has pros over Canon. If you are starting again I would suggest Canon. Because both systems shoot good but Canon is much cheaper. I shot a Canon 1Dx and it had very good clarity but the shutter and BBF was too wide for my fingers. So be happy whatever system you decide to go with.


May 03, 2016 at 07:35 PM
mongoose777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


phototoronto wrote:
I shoot Nikon and wish they released a new 200-400 f4 with built in TC

Why?
Ive heard several colleagues from Getty to AP say the Canon 200-400 needs to be carefully calibrated and the
images don't hold up too well on the high end, using the tele makes it even worse.
The Nikon 200-400 vr2 & a D4s is better overall.



May 22, 2016 at 01:51 PM
mongoose777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


Stripper wrote:
This is a money thing. The new long Nikon Fluorite lenses are lighter and better but the 200-400 Canon is better. Truth to tell...just like everybody else says, the gear is so close that nobody is going to pay more for photos taken with one or the other.

You need to put it on a spreadsheet and see where the money is. The money is not in shooting mortorsport...that is for sure.

JohnCote


Hi John,
Just curious, why would the Canon 200-400 be better than the 400 FL or the 200-400 vr2?




May 22, 2016 at 01:53 PM
mongoose777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


leewoolery wrote:
I shoot with both Nikon and Canon systems and the latest 300 mm f.2.8 lenses from both are excellent...with 1.4 teleconverters attached as well.

The AF, sharpness, contrast and handling are equally impressive.

The key is using pro caliber bodies so that means D3, D3s, D4, D4s D5 for Nikon or 1Dx or 1Dx Mark II for Canon to get the best from each combo.

The AF, high ISO performance, color and handling of the D4s and 1Dx are quite remarkable and the D5 and 1Dx Mark II will be even better so you can't go wrong with either company's flagship camera.

Since you
...Show more
Well said!




May 22, 2016 at 01:55 PM
mongoose777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Nikon vs Canon sports lenses


P Alesse wrote:
So close that it doesn't matter but I will say this... in terms of using your gear for portraiture in addition to sports action, Nikon beats Canon when it comes to color pop, noise, and DR. I have shot both and have employed shooters from both camps and Nikon beatd Canon everytime on those criteria points.


I agree 100% with Paul.
I was a Canon shooter for many years before switching about 9 years ago because of the infamous 'Sub-Mirror reflex' issue on the MK3 camera.
I shot with the great Eos-3 & Eos 1V and bought my first digital when the D30 (3.1mp) came out in 2000.
I loved the 200 1.8 over my 300is & 400is because it was a very versatile lens.
The newer glass for both Nikon & Canon appear to be a tad sharper and lighter than previous older lens because of the magnesium lens bodies and newly coated lens. They are both great systems, but of course I prefer Nikon because I believe they are slightly sharper and have a 'lil more pop, plus I have so much invested in Nikon.



May 22, 2016 at 02:12 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

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.