New camera for motorsports

The Sigma 100-300 f4 is pretty good, the Sigma 70-200 is not quite so good in my experience.

However, why not try the Nikon 70-300 VR? I think that will be cheaper and maybe even more suitable... until you get to some seriously expensive glass you really can't touch it despite it being f4-5.6.....
 
I had a 300d and then I upgraded to the 40d and the difference in the way it felt was amazing!! The 40d feels really good (for me!) and I also have the sigma 120-400 for motorsports and the combination works well.

Just ordered a nifty fifty as well! Very excited!! :thumbs:

At the end of the day it's what feels right for you.
 
agreed, dont compare the canon xxxD range to the xxD range. completely different size and layout. i went from a 300D to a 20D and its so much bigger and better layed out.

siggy 70-200 is spot on for rallys in my experience.
 
lfc856 said:
Hi Guys,

I've been using my Nikon D40 for motorsports for about a year now, and while overall I'm happy with the picture quality (and ergonomics) I find the autofocus and burst shooting modes frustratingly slow.

As a result I'm looking to upgrade to something faster, which is where I'm getting stuck. From a bit of research I can see that the D300 is probably ideal, however it's a bit too expensive. The next obvious choice would be the D90, but I'm not sure how it compares to the 300 in terms of AF speed.

My other thought (die-hard Nikon fans turn away now :shake:) is to switch to Canon, and perhaps pick up a 40D which I've heard great things about. It seems that Canon have a great range of lenses that also have the benefit of being less expensive than the Nikon counterparts.

I only have the kit lens and 70-300vr so my investment in Nikon glass isn't extensive, so it would ease the switchover if I were to do the unthinkable :bonk:.

Do you guys have any wisdom you can share? I really love the Nikon's I've handled, but Canon's range of lenses makes a very good case for itself.

Thanks in advance,
Mark
Click to expand...

are you sure you need a new camera? i quite like your photos the way they are!
 
There's two basic requirements for motorsport shooting:

1. Fast camera.
2. Fast glass.

I can add another, if you're shooting for someone else:

Weatherproofing - come rain or shine, your client or market will still want the shot.

I can only speak from the Canon side, but I'd suggest a good s/h 1D (any!) with a nod to a 40D, with lenswise, a 70-200mm IS L + 1.4 Canon TC - That's good for circuits (I've done Oulton, Donington, Silverstone and Rockingham) *and* the stages.

-Rob

Your gear doesn't need to be the newest, just looked after properly.
 
I think Nikons biggest drawback is the availability of what you might call semi pro lenses, such as canons 24-105mm f/4 L and 100-400mm L , both are very capable lenses at consumer prices, the nikon 80-400mm isn't anywhere near as good as the 100-400mm.

With Nikon once you go over 200mm it's pro lenses at £3000+

for instance you have 4 versions of the Canon 70-200mm to chose from, the F4, F4IS, f/2.8, F/2.8 IS, all have fast AF , if you want a Nikon it's F/2.8 VR at £1500 or nothing.

If you're serious about motorsport photography it's all about the light, f/2.8 means you can stay at ISO 200 when the lower spec lenses need to to start bumping it up which means more noise

The sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM Mk 1 is the sigma lens to go for, the later macro isn't as good , the 100-300mm is OK but IMO isn't worth the money being asked for today £650-700 secondhand
 
You could get a second hand D2Hs - if you can find one - or a D2 or D2x for around your budget - these are built for the job - anything erlse is just giving yourself hard work and grief - unless you get a D3 of course! ;)
 
wack61 said:
I think Nikons biggest drawback is the availability of what you might call semi pro lenses, such as canons 24-105mm f/4 L and 100-400mm L , both are very capable lenses at consumer prices, the nikon 80-400mm isn't anywhere near as good as the 100-400mm.

With Nikon once you go over 200mm it's pro lenses at £3000+

for instance you have 4 versions of the Canon 70-200mm to chose from, the F4, F4IS, f/2.8, F/2.8 IS, all have fast AF , if you want a Nikon it's F/2.8 VR at £1500 or nothing.

If you're serious about motorsport photography it's all about the light, f/2.8 means you can stay at ISO 200 when the lower spec lenses need to to start bumping it up which means more noise

The sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM Mk 1 is the sigma lens to go for, the later macro isn't as good , the 100-300mm is OK but IMO isn't worth the money being asked for today £650-700 secondhand
Click to expand...

This is my main concern with going the Nikon route, as I imagine the semi-pro lenses are as far as I'd go.

Having said that I only do this as a hobby so I'm not looking to blow tons of money chasing incremental differences in picture quality (at least to my eye).
 
The difference in a pro body (2nd hand) v some of the bodies you are looking at is immense - they really are built for this sort of thing. At least go and handle one somewhere and see if you prefer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top