Alright, as the OSU v. Michigan game draws nearer(I'm a lucky student with a ticket), its more and more apparent that this is not a game to forget my cameras. Ive heard the 7o-200 vr is the better sports lens, but im concerned with the reach, as opposed to the 80-400 vr. any suggestions? advice? inquiries on buying my ticket lol?
Cam, I have both lenses and both are great lenses. If your big game is played in daylight, get the 80-400VR for the extra "reach". However, if the game is at night get the 70-200VR and you will need to set your ISO to H.3 (2000)with the high ISO noise reduction set to high and be on the sidlines to get any decent shots. The 70-200VR is simply not long enough to shoot from the stands. I would suggest a monopod with either lens. Cheers, Bill P.
One thing to be sure about is whether or not you can even take a lens like that into the stadium. Usually they have requirements that "no long lens allowed" which is obviously not very specific. I bet you'd be ok with an 80-400 as they are rather compact given the focal length, but the 70-200 might get you stopped at the door.
Oh, yeah, and Go Buckeyes! You beat my Longhorns, and we want another shot at title defense (if the BCS is nice to us, that is... and Louisville loses, and Florida, and that should do it!).
Stephen from Austin D200, 17-35mm 2.8, 28-70mm 2.8 70-200mm VR, 300mm AF-I 2.8
Stephen from Austin D2x, 17-55mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4 70-200mm VR
>Usually they have requirements that "no long lens allowed"
Hee-hee, maybe there's a market for Thermos-shaped lens pouches
If you go with the 70-200mm, you can try a teleconverter as well. It will cost you some light and sharpness, but you may still end up ahead of the 80-400mm (sorry, fastest thing I shot with one moves across the sky about once a day).
Jeff Bower I wish my D200 body was a significant portion of my NAS-related expenses...