Thom article and the 200-400mm

Started May 20, 2008 | Discussions thread
Wanchese Senior Member • Posts: 2,523
Re: Thom article and the 200-400mm


Shooting only my son's team (#1 U18's in USA!) , I have all the positional flexibility I want. When I was using the 70-200, with or w/o the 1.4x, I was running all over the place. With the 200-400, I have started to gain weight. I now sit just inside the corner flag, and can cover most of the action, especially with the TC. I have to scramble from one flag to the other when a corner is being taken, and I move as far off the touchline as I can on corners or extended offensive possessions to avoid having too much glass at 200mm, but for me it works. My son is a center back, so I am able to set up at the opposite end of the pitch and shoot him looking towards me most of the time. With a second body, I would have the 70-200 for action in the box nearest me.

All this goes out the window however when the sun sets and the lights come on. Then, budget notwithstanding, I would opt for Thom's suggestion, using the 400 2.8 and the 70-200. If I had the 400 f2.8, that is.

Before joining the ranks of Nikon, I shot futbol with a Pentax K10D and their stellar FA* 300mm f2.8. I got some great shots with that lens, but no where close to the quantity I get with the 200-400. The flexibility is sooo amazing.

Perhaps after I have sold my 13th cover to NG, I will break down and buy all the exotic primes. But 'till then........ the 200-400 rules!
You Will Never Walk Alone

 Wanchese's gear list:Wanchese's gear list
Nikon D4S Nikon D3 Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow