Need a new hunk of glass

[Gramps]

I shoot sports and my Nikkor 70-300 is just fine for daylight Little League games and younger kids soccer games. The problem is that my son has graduated to the big baseball field now and I have friends whose child is on the USA olympic development team and playing on regulation size soccer fields. This lens is just a bit small to reach the outfield or the other end of the soccer field.

I popped into a camera store and asked for a suggestion on a lens upgrade and was handed a Sigma 50-500 (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3307&navigator=3) and told this is the next logical step.

It seems like a nice lens, but I dont like buying anything without comparing it to something bigger and smaller. I know there must be some other options out there but I have searched the internet and come up dry.

It has the same f stop as my 70-300 so night games are out, but would like to at least compare it to something with a smaller f stop.

anyone got a suggestion? or an opinon on this lens?

[Mitchell]

What camera are you using? Will you be able to shoot with a monopod or tripod or will your photos be handheld?

What's your budget??

[Gramps]

What camera are you using? Will you be able to shoot with a monopod or tripod or will your photos be handheld?

What's your budget??

heh, should have thought about that in the last post. Pricewise, I dont think I can get over 2 grand right now. I have a monopod and a tripod, but the tripod is too hard to use following a ball around the field. I am looking for a NIkkor or Nikon compatable lens.

[ian408]

Steve C. shoots with this and has done pretty well with it. I think his both his
birds and surf are pretty spectacular.

As you note, it is pretty slow, especially at the long end so it's use will be
limited to good light.

[gus]

I think you would have to consider the sigma 70-200 f2.8 ..here are some recent samples from the sports forum taken by KMCC (http://www.digitalgrin.com/showpost.php?p=482043&postcount=1) (well priced also)

...annnd sigma also make the 120-300 f2.8 however i dont know how its priced in your market over there.

[ian408]

I think you would have to consider the sigma 70-200 f2.8 ..here are some recent samples from the sports forum taken by KMCC (http://www.digitalgrin.com/showpost.php?p=482043&postcount=1) (well priced also)

...annnd sigma also make the 120-300 f2.8 however i dont know how its priced in your market over there.

You could add a 1.4 TC to it and still loose only a stop...

[gus]

You could add a 1.4 TC to it and still loose only a stop...
Wouldnt it slow the focus significan..signiph...a good deal in poorer light ? I dont use TC's & wouldnt know but have read that.

[Mitchell]

I can't comment on that sigma lens. I suspect it will be too slow at the far end if lighting is not perfect. The autofocus will also be faster with a Nikon AF-S lens.

You may want to consider the Nikon 70-200mm, f2.8VR with a 1.4 or 1.7 teleconvertor.

Your other option is a Nikon 300mm, f4 AF-S with a teleconvertor. I use this lens on a D2X for all of my soccer shots on a regulation field. I'm now looking at a 300mm, f2.8 to replace this lens, but it is way over your budget.

What Nikon body are you shooting with. This may affect your decision.

[hgernhardtjr]

Gramps, I shoot with the Sigma "Bigma" (50-500).

It is a good lens, from macro distances to 1000mm with the Sigma 2x converter. Heavy and not bright, but it is highly cost effective and highly rated by most users. You can, of course, get better and brighter and lighter ... at much higher prices.

Do a google on "Sigma Bigma" without the quotes and look at the various pictures.

[Art Scott]

Gramps, I shoot with the Sigma "Bigma" (50-500).

It is a good lens, from macro distances to 1000mm with the Sigma 2x converter. Heavy and not bright, but it is highly cost effective and highly rated by most users. You can, of course, get better and brighter and lighter ... at much higher prices.

Do a google on "Sigma Bigma" without the quotes and look at the various pictures.

If you do not need the small end of the spectrum (50mm to 170mm), then there are 2 other choices that have gotten great revues....The SIGMA 170-500 and the TAMRON 200-500.....Since you are shooting a crop sensor either lens will get you aout to approx 750mm due to the crop factor.....Without dropping a lot of cash for a nikkor lens these are you viable options.
The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a very good lens I have the older 70-210 model and it is still quiet enough to shoot deer with and can be handheld easily enough.

[Gramps]

Wow, there certainly is alot to consider. The smaller end of the zoom is appealing. Light for most weekend games really isnt a problem. Weekday games, early April, I am done in the 2nd inning. And while a quiet lens may be appreciated by others....I shoot at ball games. With all the screaming from the stands, I dont think even the nosiest lens would bother me.

Perhaps I should ask this in a different manner. I had not considered a doubler. Right now I have the Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 lens. My thinking was that I needed 2 lenses this year. A big ole honker for distance in the spring and a good f stop for the basketball in the fall. Would I be better served with a doubler now and a short zoom in the fall?

[wxwax]

I talked to a Boston Red Sox official photo a couple of weeks ago. She said the max any of them carried was a 400. And she sounded a little skeptical about that.

I shot from dugout location with a 300, didn't think it was enough for the outfield. But she wasn't worried at all.

FWIW

[kini62]

Sigma 120-300/2.8 with at 1.4TC is your best overall choice. Faster focusing than the Bigma (I've read) plus a stop and half faster even with the TC. Half (or is it 1/3?) a stop faster even with a 2X TC, or stacked 1.4TCs.

You can find them used sometimes for quite a bit under $2000.

Gene

[DoctorIt]

Sigma 120-300/2.8 with at 1.4TC is your best overall choice. Faster focusing than the Bigma (I've read) plus a stop and half faster even with the TC. Half (or is it 1/3?) a stop faster even with a 2X TC, or stacked 1.4TCs.+1, this is a great piece of glass. No noticeable loss of focus speed with a 1.4x TC on a D1x or D2H in my experience.

[ziggy53]

Gramps,

It is common to see sports shooters with at least 2 lenses and bodies. One combination is used for when the action is near, and then another when the action is downfield. A 70-200mm (or 80-200mm), f2.8 is often the near lens, and then a 300mm, f2.8 for farther away.

The Nikkor 80-200mm, f2.8 D seems the best value, but the 70-200mm, f2.8 VR and 80-200mm, f2.8 AF-S are better performers. Coupled with a 1.4x or 1.7x Nikkor teleconverter, the latter 2 lenses might suffice for daytime use. Apparently, you need to use a Sigma, Tamron or Kenko 1.4x teleconverter with the Nikkor 80-200mm, f2.8 D, as the Nikkor converters won't mount properly. (Maybe one of our Nikon folks would kindly explain.)

If you use a teleconverter, purchase a lens case/pouch to drop the converter into when not on the camera. You don't want to mess with lens caps when the action gets thick.