Looking at all the options I think a 400mm 2.8 would give better results and you can also use the teleconverter to to go to 800mm with the new TC-20E III
I went back and looked at most of my H.S. Football images from last season with the D3 and 400/2.8.Most were at ISO 3200-6400 1/400 @2.8. I've decided to stay with 2.8 glass.Even under those conditions I think flash may be a better option to get light under helmets in the end zones.
I'm sure the D3s can manage better as far as ISO but it still won't make up for the poor lighting reaching under the helmets.
DiggerMt wrote:
I think i am leaning towards the 400mm 2.8
Regardless of the weight, it is a great lens! If you are considering buying the VR version (new) BuyDig has an open box copy for $8,500 with the full 5 years warranty. Most sellers have the lens for (more or less) $9,500. And you can get a new copy of the previous version II for $7,500 (more or less).
jopy wrote:
Scott, man those are some beautiful bird shots! If I had more time and patience, I'd love to shoot birds and wildlife, one of these years. Nice work.
Thanks John, It gets me out of the house in the Winter months and it is actually quite therapeutic.
In my own experience I find the lens a pleasure to use. Also, until you've tried it, it's hard to appreciate the usefulness of the 200-400mm zoom range.
i'm a big fan of this lens mostly due to its versatility. for me, the ability to handhold gives it a huge advantage over its bigger, heavier cousins. yes it's not 2.8 and yes it might give up just a teeny bit in the long end, but overall i love the lens. as far as schlepping it around, i have a kinesis big lens case with a backback harness and have taken it on long and difficult hikes to see stuff like this....
