A decent lens for motorsport

[spareparts]

Body: Nikon D300
Current lenses: 17-55 f2.8 (general walkabout), 50 f1.8, and 18-200 (experimenting...)

Need some help here chaps... I'm looking for a decent lens for motorsport to match the D300 body.

Under consideration:
70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR
28-300 f3.5-5.6 VR
70-200 f2.8 VR
80-200 f2.8

Some of my initial thoughts:
18-200: touch short, mediocre in all ways, but very flexible.
70-200 2.8: expensive, lovely quality, great speed, but a bit short for motorsport?
70-300: OK lens, reasonable price
28-300: might make the 17-55 a bit redundant, is speed fast enough?
80-200: optically very good, can get them at decent prices 2nd hand, but no VR. Bit short?


I don't really want to keep chopping/changing lenses... any recommendations from you lot based on your experiences with these lenses for motorsport?

TIA

[XG332]

The focal length depends on how far away you are stood.

I use my 10mm in the garages and pit lane. 50mm works great from the pit wall.
Havent really taken any from the catch fence, but 200-300 is enough for most.

[markmullen]

I use a 70-200 and a 24-105 for rallying, if I need some extra reach I use a 1.4 converter on the 70-200. At Le Mans most of my shots were in the 170-220mm area so I'm well covered there.

I am a Canon man but the focal length is the same.

Edited by markmullen on Tuesday 29th March 17:36

[corozin]

Really you want the longest thing you can get otherwise the action often ends up being a bit small. For years I made do with a 70-300 IS lens which was pretty good, but I've recently added a 100-400 to the toolbox and that is a lot better, albeit you really need to use a pole.

So in answer to your question, if you want to do a lot of motorsport and you won't be close to the action then you really need to be thinking about a 300mm rather than 200mm

HTH
John

[Simpo Two]

It depends how far away the cars are.

I'd take the 70-300VR as long as you're not too close, and a good compromise in price between a cheapo OSFA and £2K.

[MonkeyHanger]

It depends the the type of Motorsport.

Rallies - 70-200 f2.8 plus something a bit wider.

Circuit Racing - the 70-300 is the best compromise from your list.



If you venture to the likes of Silverstone & Donington, even a 300 will leave you short in a lot of areas.

[spareparts]

corozin said:

Really you want the longest thing you can get otherwise the action often ends up being a bit small. For years I made do with a 70-300 IS lens which was pretty good, but I've recently added a 100-400 to the toolbox and that is a lot better, albeit you really need to use a pole.

So in answer to your question, if you want to do a lot of motorsport and you won't be close to the action then you really need to be thinking about a 300mm rather than 200mm

HTH
John

Thanks John. So a 300mm seems the way to go... will likely give the 70-300 a try, at 55% the price of a 28-300, it seems a reasonable bet (for now!)

[RobDickinson]

Think about the sigma 100-300f4. Its an excellent lens, fast focusing, constant f4, great optics.

Have a mate with one on a D300 and he loves it.

[Simpo Two]

spareparts said:

Thanks John. So a 300mm seems the way to go... will likely give the 70-300 a try, at 55% the price of a 28-300, it seems a reasonable bet (for now!)

Caution - the Nikon 70-300VR is a different animal from the £99 specials. Hope you mean the Nikon VR one and not the £99 ones (or Nikon G) model!

[spareparts]

Simpo Two said:

Caution - the Nikon 70-300VR is a different animal from the £99 specials. Hope you mean the Nikon VR one and not the £99 ones (or Nikon G) model!

Yes, the VR job.

[spareparts]

RobDickinson said:

Think about the sigma 100-300f4. Its an excellent lens, fast focusing, constant f4, great optics.

Have a mate with one on a D300 and he loves it.

Hmmmm, interesting... Will have a look. Do Sigmas/ non-Nikons keep their value? Lower entry cost, but is this a false economy?

[RobDickinson]

Sigmas dont tend to keep quite the same % value from new-> old as nikon or canon.

Guessing it will be £800-900 new and £500ish used.

[itsnotarace]

Sigma 120-300 2.8

[RobDickinson]

Which will be what £2000-2500!?

New OS one out soon tho could be great...

[itsnotarace]

Second hand they go for about a grand, maybe a bit more.

[mattdaniels]

The 70-300 is about 350-400 quid. It's ok and of course will look "closer" on the crop sensor D300. I have the 70-300 on my D40X. It's been a great lens but suffers a bit at the 300 end especially when the light is anything other than good (which in the UK, if you are doing motorsport, more often than not it isn't).

This is from the 70-300 at 165mm, 1/160 f9 at Rockingham from the pits on a D40X :

Green Westfield by Matt_Daniels, on Flickr

Same combo at 220mm, 1/125 f11:
Blue Club Sport by Matt_Daniels, on Flickr

I also have a D700 with the 70-200VR and that is night and day in a different league but not been out to a track yet to take some shots with it there.

[spareparts]

Nice shots Matt!

The Sigmas are clearly in high demand as there are hardly any around. The 120-300 2.8 used is still at least 1k.

My camera skills are still developing, so decided to go with the 70-300VR given it's modest price, and see how it goes from here. The balance and relatively light weight of the Nikon lens is veery nice... focus seems surefooted, and the VR has helped in some test shots in dim light at home. Certainly possible to handhold at 300mm at <1/15 and still get a sharp shot.

Hope to give the lens a full test this weekend