DSLRUsers.com

Just looking to see if anyone here has had experience with this lens. I am considering purchasing it for some upcoming motorsport/sport shoots.

Sample pics and opinions (both if available) would be much appreciated.

Now the only problem is to find somewhere that has them in stock. I found one in a store here in Germany for 7000€ and cringed as it works out to be about AU$14k.

Marc has one, just sold his 300/2.8 to get it. http://dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?p=335531

These are rare, big, hard to find, fast, rare, sharp, hard to find, and not cheap. They're a very nice piece of glass.

And did I mention that they're hard to get?

I don't think Poon has any in stock at the moment, but I may know of a pre-owned one that may be available.

Hmmm, I have just gone the 300 2.8 for my motorsport work, but might also be interested in a 2nd hand 200-400 if its up for grabs?

What stuff are you shooting Smurph?

One sold a few days ago on Ebay for $4600. 2nd hand. ACT seller.

this lens is a gem.... i love shooting these guys http://robw.smugmug.com/gallery/749189#32778047
most of my sports photo's are taken with this lens, i notice somebody sold one recently for $4,600 ! i paid $8,500 !!!!!! from poon years ago
but dont be worried about the quality cause IT"S THERE !

cheers rob

team piggy wrote:Hmmm, I have just gone the 300 2.8 for my motorsport work, but might also be interested in a 2nd hand 200-400 if its up for grabs?

What stuff are you shooting Smurph?

Most definitley the Clipsal this year, and probably a lot of drift action out at Malalla(sp?) and I do some regular work for http://www.extremedriving.net whenever they run in SA - mainly for that beacsue I found that 200 was just a little too short and neeed me to be fast on my feet to capture the car at every (decent) corner.

@Gary: Let me know about the second hand one, would probably be interested once I´m back in the country in a fortnight.

@team piggy: How does the 300 2.8 hold up for motorsport? I´m just worried that it will be too short for some of my stuff, and I´ve heard that IQ drops with the use of a TC. [/quote]

I mainly shoot dirt (rally, khana,buggies) and the 300 is great, my main lens would be the 70-200 though.
Some spots (jumps etc) you need a bit of distance for safety, so the 300 is the go.

Dont forget media creds cut off at Jan 31 for Clipsal.

team piggy wrote:Dont forget media creds cut off at Jan 31 for Clipsal.

Cheers for the heads up, although I don´t think I´ll be eligible for them .

Smurph wrote:

team piggy wrote:Dont forget media creds cut off at Jan 31 for Clipsal.

Cheers for the heads up, although I don´t think I´ll be eligible for them .

Just apply, nothing to loose. That's what I did for the Morrilla International Tennis and I got my accreditation with no fuss. Good luck with it.

John

This is not a lens you can hand hold for more then a few minutes. It is very heavy. It's weight reduces its usefulness. On the performance side however, and from a sturdy tripod/monopod....it is outstanding!

Clipsal accreditation is uber-tight (read: is a fish bum waterproof, tight) this year.

I heard there is less than 100 passes and over 500 togs applied already.
(As freelance)you need to have a mainstream magazine or publisher hiring you to do their work there and you need evidence of it with your application.

I spoke to the media manager yesterday and his words were "its going to be tighter than ever"... They are apparently also short of space in the media centre.

Sadly its the type of track that unless you find a fluke spot or have accred you cant get decent framing of shots...

Good luck though!

300 2.8 + 1.4 is very very usable for motorsports

AF is still very quick even on a d200, plus also very handholdable.

even with the + 1.7, its sharp as... if you feel you have the need to goto 500mm

MattyO, you sir, are a legend.

I was umming and erring about getting this instead (300 f/2., and your statement, I think, has just sealed my fate, that and the fact that B&H have them in stock makes it a plus.

I´m guessing that it AFs ok with the TC14 and TC17 attached?

it says your a member ......log on and scroll down the first page

Smurph,

AF is noticably slower with the 1.7x converter, but is still good in bright light with the limiter on. Still perfect with the 1.4x even wide open.

i havn't really had a chance to test it out tho, as with 500mm the action needs to be a long way away

Smurph.

Drop me a PM if you want to touch one (300 2.8 that is you perverts...)
I'm located close to the City (south/west) and can cetainly meet up and let you have a play (with the lens..)
I have a 2x TC as well but not smaller yet..

I also know Poon has a couple or access to them at this stage.

Mistake

Had I spotted this lense via Poon a few months ago things might have been different.

It was simply too expensive when I needed the focal length for the summer and a new cricket season.

After much research which included consideration of the 80-400, and the Bigma I decided on the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 and combined it with a Sigma TC 1.4.
This kit maxes out to 430mm at F4 and just makes it from the boundary for cricket.

Having spent some hours doing the cricket thing, I think that 500mm is more the required beast for a full body batsman, bowler shoot.
Reckon one of the new 500mm F4 VR cannons on the back of a D300 would really do the business, but I would like to know if it would suffice on the FF D3?

See what you think - link to web gallery below.

http://www.pbase.com/steven_hight/cricket

Suri wrote:Having spent some hours doing the cricket thing, I think that 500mm is more the required beast for a full body batsman, bowler shoot.
Reckon one of the new 500mm F4 VR cannons on the back of a D300 would really do the business, but I would like to know if it would suffice on the FF D3?

From a purely technical perspective, when you use the same lens on a D3 as you do on a D300, the subject (on either dimension) will take up one third less of the frame on the D3 than the D300 because of the difference between FF and DX. For example, if you have the batsman take the full height of the frame on the D300, he would only take up two thirds of the full height on the D3.

Or to put it another way, a 500mm lens on a D300 will give you the same result (image size/pixel wise) as a 750mm lens on a D3.

Or to put it another way, a 500mm lens on a D300 will give you the same result (image size/pixel wise) as a 750mm lens on a D3.

Cheers Mr Jones - thanks for the insight.
Well I can't afford either a new D3, or the 500mm glass.
Will battle on as is for a while yet one thinks.
Love your Macro work by the way.