rbk35

Currently shooting a D7200 with the Tamron 70-200 G2. Debating upgrading the body to the D500 for faster autofocus or a large zoom ( 200-500, 150-600) for extra reach. Trying to stay around $1500.00.
Thanks

stogieboy Loc: Marlboro, NY

I can only share my experience of shooting baseball, and granted, its been for my son's little league team, but here goes:

I use the Nikon D750, and the Nikon 28-300 lens. It allows me to get the kids as they are batting, but is also fast enough that shots of running don't get blurred. I really like this lens for action shots. Every year, I take pics of all the kids on his team at bat and in the field, and then have prints made for the parents. Everyone is always so appreciative of me doing that, and complimentary of the photos (since the only other cameras I see are smartphones). Side note: I'd really like get a longer lens as well, so could get closer shots, I'd love to capture these kids' faces as they get a hit. Priceless.

Anyway, I know thats not exactly what you're looking for, but the lens is great, in my opinion. Of course, if you were to put the 28-300 on your crop sensor, you could get "closer" than I do, I don't know what (if anything) it would do for resolution. someone smarter than me can chime in on that.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I would go 200-500 lens. Bodies come and go, and decrease in value/cost over time faster than good glass. Having 70-500 covered with 2 lenses will help you get better shots now in my opinion. You can always think about a better body down the road too...

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

On your budget you can get one, not both. Since you already have a piece of third party glass with an effective field of view of 105mm to 300 mm. I would go with the D500, better focusing system, it has GROUP AUTO FOCUS that the D7200 does not have and you can shoot at 10 frames a second. High frames per second is nice to have for sports photography.

david vt Loc: Vermont

There are several talented and prolific baseball photographers here on the site, and they post a lot in the sports section. Those posts tend to name the equipment and settings used as a community “standard” In that section. Great place to compare, and ask questions

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

I upgraded long ago to D500. More FPS and almost unlimited buffer. The D7200 is a fine camera, especially for low light, but for the speed of college baseball, the D500 will make your life much easier. The 70-200 will limit you to mostly infield and shallow outfield shots, but if you're willing to move around, you can work the outfield. At 200, you have a FOV reach of 300mm.
My best results shooting any sports started coming when I got a 300mm prime lens. I also sometimes use an 80-400, but that lens feels heavy to me. So get the camera and save up for a longer lens. I started with older used lens, the 300mm f4 ED line is 3lbs, but only about $250 used on ebay or just under $400 at B&H.

FredCM Loc: Central Illinois

One word of advice is to pay close attention to where the camera decides to focus. I have shots of the grandson on the pitcher's mound taken from the 3rd base side of the fence. The first base coach is in perfect focus, the grandson... not so much.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

If you are wanting to improve autofocus performance, it would be hard to argue against the D500. I added a D500 alongside my D850 a little over a year ago and have been pleased wth it for all types of shooting. While it is great for shooting sports and wildlife, it has been mis-marketed as a sports and wildlife camera, in my opinion. Like the D850, there are very few things that it cannot do, if you prepare and learn its capabilities and how to use it. It does have a control system that is quite different from your D7100, but the differences provide additional flexibility and speed. Rarely will you have to enter the menu system to make any shooting adjustments.

The 200-500 mm f/5.6 is a great lens, but it is fairly long when extended and quite heavy. If you shoot at or near 500mm a lot, you will be dealing with a lot of weight centered pretty far in front of your camera. It can be difficult to use in tight quarters. But it is very sharp and is a very good value as it is priced. It comes with a dust bag, not a true case, but there are cases available that will work if you need one. It is not sealed against moisture, and is less resistant to moisture and dust entry than some other Nikkor lenses. This isn't necessarily a problem, but you do need to be aware of it.

I held back from buying a D500 for a long time because I had concerns around some of the issues raised here and other places around some of the design changes from what had been Nikon's standards for professional cameras. I wish I had ignored those much earlier. The absence of a pop-up flash is not a big deal. In fact, it's not a deal at all. The truth is that almost any lens is going to create a vignette shadow at the bottom of images when shooting with the pop-up flash at distances and focal lengths where flash may actually be helpful. And the composite body versus metal is not a thing either. Carbon composite is NOT the same as plastic. And it's very difficult to implement Wi-Fi on a metal camera...the metal blocks radiation from the antenna. I have on a couple of occasions missed having a focus assist light, but it's almost never a problem in reality.

Not knowing your shooting routine makes it pretty inappropriate for me to make a specific recommendation for you, but I'm inclined to think that you might be better served by updating your camera first. You may find that your routine changes and leads you to a somewhat different lens than what you are thinking about now.

slcarn Loc: Draper, Utah USA

Below are a couple of photos of my Grandson who plays college baseball. The first, driving the ball into center field, is with an D850 and 70-200mm lens from the second row back. The second photo, steeling second base, is with a D500 and 300mm lens with 1.4TC from 50' behind the left center field fence (covid 19 no one allowed in stadium).

One option, if you can get fairly close to the field, is to keep the equipment you have and get a 1.4 Teleconverter. Here are the reasons. First, a faster lens is needed for night time games. The telephotos you mention aren't that good in low light (I have a Tamron 150-600 G2). Second, you have the most ideal equivalent range already with a 125-300mm. Then with a 1.4TC you can get up to 420mm on the long end.

Another option is purchase a Nikon 300mm f/4 PF prime telephoto lens. With the 7200, a 300mm with a 1.4TC you get the range and clarity I had on the second photo.

A third option would be to get a D500 and a 1.4 Teleconverter for your 70-200 G2, you would get the 10 frames per second and better AF of the D500 and the 420mm on the long end.

I think you can get great photos with any of these options. Good luck in your quest!

Steve

(Download)


(Download)

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Most of my better baseball shots are taken with my 70-200. I also employ my 300 and, upon occasion my 400, mostly for the outfield but my 70-200 remains my go-to lens. The longer lenses do have their place, yet they will tend to strand you if/when the action comes close. Best of luck.

Barndog Loc: Tacoma

Depends on where you will be shooting from, what kind of access you will have. Might want to look at some used gear. I have a D500 and it has become my secondary or back up body. Not impressed with its low light capabilities. The D4s I purchased is far superior to the D500 in my opinion. The 200-500 lens you can find at MPB for some pretty good prices. I really haven’t found anyone who can beat their prices. KEH comes close. They sell used gear and it has become the primary place I purchase anything.

tomcat

I agree. D4s is much better in low light. I would recommend him to get a used D4s and the 200-500 mm lens. An awesome combo.

Tinkwmobile

I have taken many college baseball pictures over the years, as a fan, not a relative.

Selection of lens is critical. As one person pointed out, the long lens will be useless at the wrong spot. My long lens is not fast enough to get good nighttime pictures. Our college games are often played at night once temps pick up. Get a fast lens that can be used night and daylight.

I typically focus on what I plan to shoot, for example with a runner at first that I know likes to steal, I will focus on 2nd for a good pic opportunity. Too much of our field is blocked by net making it more of a challenge. I like to find a spot down 3rd or 1st base line in a corner that's net free. Long lens works well in that situation. The school generally has a couple of pros at most games now. Of course those guys have field access and often carry two bodies with different lenses so they are ready.

If I am shooting from the stands I typically use a mono-pod, helps a lot with stability with the long lens.

I love taking burst pics of pitcher in motion. Tried doing that with batters, but too many misses or past balls.

Know where you are on the field, know your players and lineup. Be prepared before the play.

cascom Loc: Redmond

I love my D500 and will use it with a prime 300 F2.8 and a 1.4 extender from the outfield. I have also found my D750 with a cheap 28-300 works very well shooting through the fence. I use a step stool to shoot over the fence at both the 1st and 3rd bases. Be aware that most D-1 colleges will require a media credential to use a professional looking camera at a sporting event. This is both for liability and a NCAA ruling that athletes can't be given anything special that a normal student doesn't receive.

wthomson Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Let me put in a plug for a used Nikon 1 V2 (up to 60 fps) with the 70-300 lens. Also excellent for birding, and in combo with the 10-100 lens, makes a terrific and lightweight travel package.