Zoom or Prime lens...

[Felters]

Have a Nikon D80 with a 18-135 lens - only problem is that the lens is a bit short for sports photgraphy...

I'm thinking about buying either a Nikon 300mm f4 lens (£800 or so) or the new Nikon 70-300mm VR lens at about £370. I know the quality of the glass may be better in the fixed length lens but will it really be obvious? I assume that there is a law of diminishing returns working here.

I'll probably ignore your advice and just buy the expensive one anyway - but what is your guidance?

Cheers
Mike

[Qoda]

I am biased in favour of primes, simpler is better, less compromise in the construction.
I have only 1 zoom (100~400)
Regards

[RobDickinson]

70-300mm VR is f5.6 at 300mm as opposed to f4 on the prime.

Wont hold a candle (or shouldnt) to the 300mm prime for image quality, but wins for 70-299mm.

Depensd what else you have but I'd prolly go for the zoom at that end unless I was a pro or knew exactly where I'd be shooting from most the time.

Edit :
http://www.bythom.com/70300VRlens.htm

By the looks of it its pretty poor from 200mm upwards and the prime at 300mm will kick its arse severely wide open.

Edited by RobDickinson on Thursday 4th October 01:19

[VxDuncan]

(my usual advice I know) Go for a S/H 80-200 F2.8. Nice and sharp (far better than the cheap plastic consumer grade Nikon stuff) and very fast. Then add a 1.4x or 2x (pushing it for sport) teleconverter. The 70-300 VR is (IMHO) slow, cheap glass in a fancy VR package that will make people buy it. The VR might give 3 stops of shake reduction, but your exposures will be 4x as long as at F2.8 so you'll get subject movement.

VR might stop the shakes, but it won't freeze the movement...

[Podie]

Had a similar question about lens choice on the Canon’s that the missus and I use.

We decided to go the zoom route. We’re not pros and would rather have the flexibility of a zoom, but each to their own.

Also, don’t be shy of secondhand kit… can get some real bargains.

[_dobbo_]

Have you considered the 80-400 VR? I have one and it's a cracking bit of kit.

On the other hand I'm posting this from 6,000 miles away from home and I don't have the 80-400 with me as combined with all my other kit it just takes it over the edge into "too heavy".

[furtive]

All the pics in my London Zoo set on Flickr were taken with a Nikon 70-300VR, mostly at 300mm, just to give you an idea of what it can do:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furtives/sets/7215760...

[Podie]

furtive said:

All the pics in my London Zoo set on Flickr were taken with a Nikon 70-300VR, mostly at 300mm, just to give you an idea of what it can do:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furtives/sets/7215760...

Nice shot.

[Felters]

Thx everybody - couldn't really decide what to do so have covered my bases and bought a s/h but unused 300mm F4 prime and a new 55-200 VR. The 300mm was £380 and the other £120 both on ebay.

Going to Silverstone soon and will report back - but I have a good feeling about the 300mm...