picsman Loc: Scotland

I shoot mtb using Nikon 70-200 f4 and a 16-35 and sometimes a fisheye zoom with a D750 But have wondered about using a prime lens hopefully for sharper images. I haven’t compared any primes to zooms for third party reports eg DxO mark, but wondering what other sports shooters think from their experience of using zooms and primes. I am not interested in discussion of technique to improve sharpness just comparison of the lenses.

Jaackil Loc: Massachusetts

I shoot different sports, Lacrosse and Hockey. You also don’t mention the primes you are considering. For lacrosse I use a zoom 70-300 on a D7200. However for hockey I use 2 primes. A 50mm 1.8 and 85 mm 1.8. I am not sure this is going to address your question directly because I assume you want to know about longer primes. However I do not find a lot of difference in sharpness between these particular lenses. On the feild I need the zoom because of the distance issues. Even from the sidelines play can be up to 100 yards or more away or as close as a couple of feet. That distance can change rapidly. In a rink play is never more than 50-60 feet away. Usually anything more than that I am just shooting backs. But in a rink which usually has poor lighting a fast lens is needed. So I guess the first question I would ask myself is how far away is the action and does that distance change? Shooting mtb I am assuming is in daylight so a fast lens is less important than flexibility of focal length. Will primes actually be sharper? Yes but maybe not as noticeable as you might want. However a faster lens that will give you more separation may give you perceived sharpness. Have you considered the 80-200 2.8? It supposedly is arguably the sharpest lens Nikon produces. My suggestion is to rent the lens or lenses you are considering and see for yourself under the conditions you are shooting. I don’t like lab results as much as seeing with my own eyes. Good luck.

picsman Loc: Scotland

Hi Jaackil,
Thanks for responding. Generally I use zooms because they do allow the options of shooting at various distances which means different berms or jumps are possible in one or two bursts for the same rider. A prime will not allow that but will concentrate on the closest feature for a single burst. Also many trails are in the woods so a fast lens is preferable if not using flash and that is the scenario I was mainly thinking of. Speed of autofocus is also an issue. Your idea of the 80-200 is a good one so many thanks for that. Cheers

picsman Loc: Scotland

Hi Jaackil,
Thanks for responding. Generally I use zooms because they do allow the options of shooting at various distances which means different berms or jumps are possible in one or two bursts for the same rider. A prime will not allow that but will concentrate on the closest feature for a single burst. Also many trails are in the woods so a fast lens is preferable if not using flash and that is the scenario I was mainly thinking of. Speed of autofocus is also an issue. Your idea of the 80-200 is a good one so many thanks for that. Cheers

Jaackil Loc: Massachusetts

Ok sounds like that 80-200 2.8 will fit your needs. In addition to being sharp and fast it is also known for its lightning fast focus locking. It is the preferred lens of most sports shooters Nikon or Canon. It’s also a favorite of many portrait shooters. There is a reason it is the most favored lens in both the Canon and Nikon lines by most Pro’s. If your budget can afford it I would go Nikon over 3rd party. While the 3rd parties are good they never fully measure up to the Nikon or Canon OEM’s. Good Luck!

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Not really enough info here to give any advice, but, as a sports action shooter I can say my 70-200/2.8 is a go to lens. I use all sorts of lenses to shoot sports, both zoom and fixed focal length. What, where and when? Best of luck.