JimGarnett
18th May 2012, 05:18 PM
I had to think a long time before buying this lens. I already have a 70-200mm AF-S VR so for the difference, would it be worth it? Nikon didn't have a 'loaner' so I went out on a limb and bought one. Boy, am I glad I did! I shoot a lot of football all winter. I use the 200mm on a monopod. The f2 throws a bright, crisp image into the viewfinder and the autofocus is very fast. The memory set and memory buttons allow me to pre-focus on the 'keeper and follow the game. I keep one digit on one of the memory buttons and as the action goes into the goalmouth, just a touch and I'm locked onto the middle of the box. Perfect when the af would want to follow someone crossing the action. It's been such a great lens, last season [2011-2012] I used it for every game - the 70-200mm f2.8 didn't get a look in. On weekends I'm not 'assigned' I'll still go find a game and get 3-4 photo spreads run in the local newspaper.
During cricket season, I use the 500mm f4 on the far wicket and the 200mm f2 with a 2X on the closer wicket, so it's a 400mm f4 [which I'm sad to say Nikon don't make... yet]. I was a huge fan of the old Nikon 400mm f3.5, which I used a lot with the Nikon F3HP all the time.
This lens is paying it's way... fast.
During cricket season, I use the 500mm f4 on the far wicket and the 200mm f2 with a 2X on the closer wicket, so it's a 400mm f4 [which I'm sad to say Nikon don't make... yet]. I was a huge fan of the old Nikon 400mm f3.5, which I used a lot with the Nikon F3HP all the time.
This lens is paying it's way... fast.