1) I have not seen any claim from Nikon that the D4 is a stop better than the D3s. Most of the Nikon information seems to say "as good as" or "increase in color sturation / contrast" etc. I also have not seen any side by side images at ISO 12800 and above for comparison purposes. They have said the low light focus has improved by a stop.
2) For field sports during daylight hours, the 200-400f4 is hard to beat. Most sports images are taken inside 40 yards and many inside 20 yards. Even with the 200-400f4, you still need a second body with a 70-200.
3) I am not a fan of tc's on zoom lenses. The 70-200f2.8 / 1.4 tc is the exception. I have seen some very good images with 200-400 and a tc, but for sports, it is pretty hit and miss.
4) At night under typical HS type lighting, the f2.8 lenses rule. College stadium f4 maybe.
You need to determine what your true needs are before making a purchase. Try to rent both before buying, but don't expect the D4 to make a poor lens decision a good one.
1) I have not seen any claim from Nikon that the D4 is a stop better than the D3s. Most of the Nikon information seems to say "as good as" or "increase in color sturation / contrast" etc. I also have not seen any side by side images at ISO 12800 and above for comparison purposes. They have said the low light focus has improved by a stop.
2) For field sports during daylight hours, the 200-400f4 is hard to beat. Most sports images are taken inside 40 yards and many inside 20 yards. Even with the 200-400f4, you still need a second body with a 70-200.
3) I am not a fan of tc's on zoom lenses. The 70-200f2.8 / 1.4 tc is the exception. I have seen some very good images with 200-400 and a tc, but for sports, it is pretty hit and miss.
4) At night under typical HS type lighting, the f2.8 lenses rule. College stadium f4 maybe.
You need to determine what your true needs are before making a purchase. Try to rent both before buying, but don't expect the D4 to make a poor lens decision a good one.
ishootsports3 wrote:
Id agree that glass is ultimate, but I have heard from a few sources including a few I know and trust personally who say D4 is a stop better than D3s
I hope your sources are correct. A few extra pixels and better low light performance (image and AF) would make the body much more attractive. I routinely shoot a D3s at ISO 12,800.......25600 would be great. Unofficially, I have heard the overall image quality may be a little better, but I don't see any claims frrom Nikon. I would expect comparison images are just around the corner.
The D3s is a great camera and the OP will find out everything he needs to know if he can rent both lenses and shoot them on his D3s.
Well I have been at an International Bobsleigh and Skeleton competition this weekend and not a 400 prime in sight. Lots of 200 - 400's though. Chatted to some of the photographers with the 200 - 400's and they could not say enough good things about the lens. Versatility seemed to be the biggest plus point they all mentioned.
