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 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?

  
 
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


I'm thinking about a used Nikon 400/2.8, to be used bare and with a 1.4 TC. How important is VR in these focal lengths for sports?


Thanks



Sep 12, 2016 at 12:48 AM
RandyR
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


Not at all but be careful, Nikon only commits to provide spare parts for 7 years after a lens is discontinued


Sep 12, 2016 at 04:07 AM
Grantland
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


I shoot the 400 f/2.8 II lens which doesn't have VR. It is a great lens and for sports you don't need/use VR. I pair it with a D4 and D500.

On the D500 its reach is 600 mm at f/2.8. Nice.







Sep 12, 2016 at 02:10 PM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


Randy's info has me thinking that I need to up my purse for a VR v1. The prior version, the AFS II, was discontinued in 2007, so it's already two years over the spare parts commitment. It seems like most of the 4002.8's (and most super tele) have been to Nikon at least once or twice, so this is a legitimate concern. An upside is that they hold their value so I can turn it over without much loss if I have to (legitimizing the purchase in my mind)

Nice shots you posted, Grant. I've got a D500 that I'd be using it with too. I'm considering selling my D750 to buy another one.



Sep 12, 2016 at 02:44 PM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


I shot this back in 2008 with a Canon 40D and 400/2.8 IS II. I had better results with this combo then a 1DMk3 and a 300/2.8 + 1.4 TC. I've got a Sigma 120-300 with the D500 which is great, but a little longer and 2.8 is killer.







Sep 12, 2016 at 03:25 PM
leewoolery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


la puffin wrote:
I'm thinking about a used Nikon 400/2.8, to be used bare and with a 1.4 TC. How important is VR in these focal lengths for sports?

Thanks


These images were taken with a Nikon AF-D 400 f/2.8 on a D500 and D750 and the lens has been working flawlessly for 6 years now.

I have never needed IS or VR for any of my super telephotos but the newer lenses do focus slightly faster, more accurately are a tad sharper and lighter than the older models.

For night soccer and football, the extra reach of the D500, 10 FPS, accurate AF, deep buffer and f/2.8 are hard to beat.





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo





© Lee Woolery Speedshot Photo




Sep 12, 2016 at 07:04 PM
RandyR
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?



la puffin wrote:
Randy's info has me thinking that I need to up my purse for a VR v1. The prior version, the AFS II, was discontinued in 2007, so it's already two years over the spare parts commitment. It seems like most of the 4002.8's (and most super tele) have been to Nikon at least once or twice, so this is a legitimate concern. An upside is that they hold their value so I can turn it over without much loss if I have to (legitimizing the purchase in my mind)

Nice shots you posted, Grant. I've got a D500 that
...Show more
I bet the d750 is way better at high ISO

Also the 400vr is vr2, unlike the 300 there was never a 400vr1



Sep 13, 2016 at 03:52 AM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


RandyR wrote:
I bet the d750 is way better at high ISO

Also the 400vr is vr2, unlike the 300 there was never a 400vr1


It's not that much better, not enough to make up for the slower AF. I bought it for versatility and because I couldn't afford a D5. When I got back into photography after seven years off, I bought a D500 first, so I use that as my baseline.




Sep 13, 2016 at 12:25 PM
Trevorma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


I was on the verge of buying an older AFS-II 400mm 2.8.

I called Nikon Canada and they told me that they do still repair it (even if it was grey market, as I was buying from an American seller on here), BUT that parts were already in VERY short supply. I then contacted a lens repair place near my home and they told me the same story.

This is of course Canada, however if we are having parts shortages for older lenses I would be willing to bet that the US and the rest of the world is as well.

Take that in to account when you decide what to do.



Sep 13, 2016 at 12:43 PM
JMDobson
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


I was in the same boat as you and bought the VRII. I did so for several reasons.
1. Repairability. I knew I was going to keep this lens for a long time, and I wanted to make sure I could get it fixed when the worst happens.
2. Cost of ownership - If I ever needed to sell the lens, I would get a lot of my money back on a version that is newer. (maybe)
3. VR! I shoot video of sports, and with VR on and a monopod, I get footage that I am really happy with. Also, I find myself using the lens for other work, and I like being able to hand hold at slower shutter speeds.
4. I waited and got a killer price, so it was only a couple hundred more than the older version.



Sep 13, 2016 at 08:52 PM
la puffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


JMDobson wrote:
I was in the same boat as you and bought the VRII. I did so for several reasons.
1. Repairability. I knew I was going to keep this lens for a long time, and I wanted to make sure I could get it fixed when the worst happens.
2. Cost of ownership - If I ever needed to sell the lens, I would get a lot of my money back on a version that is newer. (maybe)
...
4. I waited and got a killer price, so it was only a couple hundred more than the older version.


Thank you all for the info. I've settled on trying to find a 400/2.8 VR (not the latest FL) anywhere in Northern to Central Coast California. I may need to turn the lens over next Spring and the more marketable, the better. I took a huge hit selling my L lenses this summer off of Craigslist (I'm a believer in overkill so packing and shipping is a pain in the neck), but that doesn't seem to be the case with this lens and the channels I've learned about.



Sep 14, 2016 at 11:09 AM
RandyR
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 400/2.8 prime - VR or not?


This is the best place to buy used


Sep 14, 2016 at 03:41 PM





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.