What nikon body do you use for sports photography?

[TheLost]

When you're shooting sports (meaning: moving target, usually at a distance, and sometimes in poor arena lighting), the glass matters more than the body. You'll likely want at least an f2.8 200mm zoom with VR and a monopod.

You don't need VR for sports.

Maybe If you are trying to get a panning shot and are shooting in the 1/60th range.. sure, VR might help.

However..

• VR delays focus acquisition while its starting up (You can get around this by using AF-ON).
• VR drains your battery faster.
• VR doesn't help if your subject is moving.

I've had my 70-200 f/2.8 for years now... and i think i've turned on VR maybe twice

 

[KmH]

. . . the D800 is a dream camera!!!

For many that dream is a nightmare when they realize they need to spend something like 2x the cost of a D800/810 to upgrade their lenses so they can actually benefit from the resolution of the image sensor.

The same thing happened several years back when Nikon introduced the D3x.

 

[D-B-J]

. . . the D800 is a dream camera!!!

For many that dream is a nightmare when they realize they need to spend something like 2x the cost of a D800/810 to upgrade their lenses so they can actually benefit from the resolution of the image sensor.

The same thing happened several years back when Nikon introduced the D3x.

Yeah I ended up dropping close to 2k on 2 new lenses when my D800 came in... And I still have more that need upgrading...

 

[sm4him]

get the lens first

^THAT. A 70-200 f/2.8 lens will probably do more to help you with sports photography than changing the camera body. That's not to say the camera body doesn't matter at all--but I'd pick up the lens NOW and then start working on upgrading the body.

 

[goodguy]

THAT. A 70-200 f/2.8 lens will probably do more to help you with sports photography than changing the camera body. That's not to say the camera body doesn't matter at all--but I'd pick up the lens NOW and then start working on upgrading the body.

I agree the lens is very critical for this type of shooting but from my experience its the total combination of the lens and body that really shine, if both are very capable is when you start seeing magic.

 

[D-B-J]

THAT. A 70-200 f/2.8 lens will probably do more to help you with sports photography than changing the camera body. That's not to say the camera body doesn't matter at all--but I'd pick up the lens NOW and then start working on upgrading the body.

I agree the lens is very critical for this type of shooting but from my experience its the total combination of the lens and body that really shine, if both are very capable is when you start seeing magic.

Yes, both need to be top-shelf for GOOD night-sport shots. Really. Like I'd rather a d800 and 70-300 VR than a D3100 and 70-200 2.8VRII. But maybe that's just me.

To the OP, you're best bet is to get something like a used D7000 and a used 80-200 2.8D. That's could be done for probably $1200 which should be around you 800£ budget.. I think..

 

[Derrel]

I shot sports for a pair of newspapers, part of an 18-paper media group, throughout 2005 and 2006 and into early 2007. I used the Nikon D1h, Nikon D2x, which at the time were pretty good bodies. I used mainly the 70-200 AF-S VR lens, and the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AF-S Mark II (the lightweight, magnesium barreled model which is a sweet lens!), the manual focus 400mm f/3.5 Ai-S ED-Internal Focus, and the 200mm f/2 AF-S VR-G a small amount. The D2x was fine in good light, and had a strong, wide-area AF focus system.

The last sports event I shot was a college baseball triple header, parts of game 2 and all of game 3. I used the D3x, the 300/2.8, and my 25-year old Bogen aluminum monopod and nothing else. Had not shot a baseball game in about five years or so I guess, but the 300/2.8 and D3x is an easy-to-shoot combo off of a monopod. The frames per second rate is not all that fast, but the lag time on it is almost instant,and the D3 series camera have a big, sharp, crisp, clear viewfinder than makes it very easy to SEE what the heck is happening. It's a very fast camera to respond to the shutter press,and it's even faster if the LCD review is set to OFF, which I do...speeds it up a little bit, according to the techies who have gear to measure that kinda stuff. The same thing was true with the D2x as well. Here's some of the baseball shots I got: Corban vs Antelope Valley Photo Gallery by Derrel at pbase.com

 

[bc_steve]

. . . the D800 is a dream camera!!!

For many that dream is a nightmare when they realize they need to spend something like 2x the cost of a D800/810 to upgrade their lenses so they can actually benefit from the resolution of the image sensor.

The same thing happened several years back when Nikon introduced the D3x.

add another grand or two to upgrade your computer so it can handle the big files!

 

[shadowlands]

. . . the D800 is a dream camera!!!

For many that dream is a nightmare when they realize they need to spend something like 2x the cost of a D800/810 to upgrade their lenses so they can actually benefit from the resolution of the image sensor.

The same thing happened several years back when Nikon introduced the D3x.

Yeah I ended up dropping close to 2k on 2 new lenses when my D800 came in... And I still have more that need upgrading...

Shoot, I love my little nifty fifty on my D800. Rocks!!!!

 

[DBA]

Like others have mentioned, buy the lens first. I had a D5100 paired to a 70-200 f/2.8 for awhile and had very good results. After that I jumped up to a pair of D600's for 1 1/2 years, now on a D4s and D600 combo. Through all these body upgrades the best quality improvement I ever had was when I jumped up to fast glass (f/2.8).

BTW I shoot motocross/action sports.