Anyone using a 500 F4 for football/rugby

[bigrob]

Just wondering with the high ISO capability of the newer bodies like the 1Dx and the D4 whether anyone here is shooting with a 500/4?

Or is the loss of the extra stop too much to lose for games under lights?

 

[whitey]

Seem to see a fair few up here. dont use one personally though but there is plenty of them about

 

[Gary Coyle]

Know someone who uses a 600 f/4 and D3S

Except for the obvious close in 70-200mm f/2.8 images all these here http://simonwilkinson.photoshelter.com/gallery/Wigan-v-Leeds-27-Sept-2013/G00002YYMBZEGSRs/

here http://simonwilkinson.photoshelter.com/gallery/Leeds-Rhinos-v-St-Helens-20-Sept-2013/G0000AGDtqsP1feU/

and here http://simonwilkinson.photoshelter.com/gallery/Huddersfield-Giants-v-Hull-FC-19-Sept-2013/G0000USfWuJBKlX0/

Those were all taken on grounds where the lights are superb and can get away with f/4 at ISO 4000 or less at 1/800th in centre field, drops off towards corners though

 

[bigrob]

I just wondered about it as on option against a 400/2.8.

As per the other thread I think I need to get something longer than the 300.

All in all I am thinking the 400 is probably the better option as I reckon I can get a 400/2.8 IS for what I could sell the 300/2.8 II for.

 

[Tugster]

In good light Robin, I liked shooting with the 1d4 with 1.4 TCMK2 and the 400 2.8IS.

That combo for me worked really well. That was for RL. It left a big gap when shooting with the 70-200 on the other body. But it also gave me more time to change over.

I've just sent two bodies for the re-call. I've asked for them back cleaned and modified for Friday, keeping fingers crossed.

 

[bigrob]

Thanks for input Tug. I have had that problem with the 300 when I have left it too late to swap.

I am going to look for a late model 400 then.

 

[pope]

The Getty guy i work with uses a 500 f4, for rubgy/football.

May depend also on if you think you will do any cricket and what ground.