Nikon 200/400mm f2.8 or 400mm f2.8 for sports and wildlife

ndwgolf

ndwgolf

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,692
Name
Neil Williams
Edit My Images
No
Guys I am in a pickle;
I already have the Top Prime Zooms;
14/24mm
24/70mm
70/200mm
But now I need to go longer for sports photography (mainly golf, racing cars/bikes) and also wildlife
I was thinking of going with the 200/400mm f2.8 to make the set then somebody else recommends the 400mm f2.8 (a wee bit more expensive)
So my question is pro's and cons for each of these lens
Thanks in advance
 
IIRC, the 200-400mm zoom is f/4
 
Neil a prime lens has one fixed focal length, a zoom has a range of focal lengths, you appear to be confusing the two.

The 200-400 is a zoom and is f4, the 400 is a prime and f2.8.

The 200-400 is flexible and lighter, however the 400 will be the better optically, and will focus a lot quicker, it will also be a fair bit heavier.

For field sports such as football, a 400mm f2.8 is the usual weapon of choice.

Both will take the 1.4 and 1.7TC's and still auto focus.

If I was going to be carrying one all day I would chose the 200-400.

The 200-400 f4 has a close focus distance of 6 feet, which makes it a great lens for butterflies, dragonflies and the like, as well as a useful wildlife lens.

If your definition of wildlife is birds, then I would say get a 500mm f4.
 
Martyn... said:
Neil a prime lens has one fixed focal length, a zoom has a range of focal lengths, you appear to be confusing the two.

The 200-400 is a zoom and is f4, the 400 is a prime and f2.8.

The 200-400 is flexible and lighter, however the 400 will be the better optically, and will focus a lot quicker, it will also be a fair bit heavier.

For field sports such as football, a 400mm f2.8 is the usual weapon of choice.

Both will take the 1.4 and 1.7TC's and still auto focus.

If I was going to be carrying one all day I would chose the 200-400.

The 200-400 f4 has a close focus distance of 6 feet, which makes it a great lens for butterflies, dragonflies and the like, as well as a useful wildlife lens.

If your definition of wildlife is birds, then I would say get a 500mm f4.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with that Martyn

200-400 is a cracking lens but doing wildlife I always yearn for more reach but the 500f4 is out of my reach at the moment.
 
ndwgolf said:
I know:):)
Click to expand...

Fair enough but you said in your opening post that you already have "the top prime zooms" then listed zoom lenses, I thought you were getting confused between the two.:thumbs:

Optically the 400 f2.8 is the better lens, however the 200-400 f4 is no slouch, the 200-400 has the flexibility of a zoom.

I have a 200-400 and I cannot fault it to be honest, it would be my choice, due to it being lighter and more flexible.
 
^^^^^ Thanks for the info
A while back I was getting confused about primes and zooms but my original comment (highlighted) was me being sarcastic as i was getting a lot of ribbing about that very subject a while back:):):)
I also feel the Zoom will give me more flexability and like you have already mentioned the 200/400mm is not a cheapoo lens
 
Both lenses are super sharp, and very fast focus.

The 2 main considerations will be 1. If you want to add a converter for longer focal length you will lose a lot of light with the 200-400. 2. Bokeh - The 400 2.8 bokeh is a bit better than the 200-400.

That being said, the 200-400 is a cracking lens, and you would not regret it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top