Sport Photography: 24-70 f2.8 vs 70-200 f2.8 VR1

[martyn]

#36223

Hi

I currently have a 70-200 f2.8 VR1 and a 300mm f2.8 that I use on my Nikon D750

I’m considering buying a 24-70mm, I’m considering selling he VR1 70-200 f2.8 as my 300 cover the 70-200

Do you think it will be the correct decision?

kind regards

[SimonDP]

#298192

Very difficult to say – what types of sport do you cover? Do you have accreditation which will allow you to get closer? If you feel the 300 will handle your type and style of shooting, then why not. I like the versatility of a zoom when shooting sports, makes framing easier on subjects that doesn’t keep to a constant distance to camera. Personally I use Canon, but my sport lenses are 24-105 f4 L – for rallies, certain arena type sports such as athletics and gymnastics, Sigma 120-300 f2.8 for track racing, rugby etc, and a Sigma 300-800 for cricket and track racing.

[martyn]

#298194

Hi Simon

I’m mostly doing school sports and Yes I do have Media Accreditation. I’m the guy who runs the facebook page “Brakkies Sport Fotos”
Netball, hockey, athletics, rugby, cycling. MTBiking, everything school sport
regards

[SimonDP]

#298193

24-70 will do you good, especially for the MTB, athletics, and other close encounters. 300 good for rugby, athletics, cycling etc. I’d say go for it.

[martyn]

#298195

Thank you Simon. Much appreciated. kind regards

[Norm de Plume]

#298197

24-70/105 is a useful addition, but not substitution, for a 70-200.

[martyn]

#298196

Hi Norm, I just love the 300mm f2.8, its a incredible sharp lens and I always find myself just adjusting my position (to use it),instead of swopping it out on the D750.
Yes, the 70-200 f2.8 is not bad at all, I just think that I have to choose, “far away or very close”. Ad the 70-200 is the in between.
Do you think R10 for the 70-200 f2.8 VR1 is a good price? or is it to much?. kind regards

[Author]

Posts