danielheary wrote:
Have a D850 and a 200-500 f5.6 VR....is a prime 500 f4 non VR better if I am constantly shooting sports at 1200 sp+ ?... looking for recommendations.....I never use VR on 200-500....thoughts...and what price range ? Ty
500 f4 is better if you don't have quite enough light for the 200-500. Otherwise the 200-500 is more versatile.
600 f4 or 800 f5.6, now that's a different story. Both have huge advantages over the zoom.
Do you shoot sports for pay or just for fun, because that may make a difference in what equipment you actually need?
I'm actually looking at the 120-300 f2.8 with a 1.4 converter. That would make it faster and it would zoom to 420, so fairly close to the same reach. The football field I shoot on the most, not this year because of covid, but normally it is so dark that I have to underexpose with a 70-200 f2.8 at 8,000 iso. The 120-300 would be much more versatile for football and be faster than the 500f4.
As far as price, that depends on how new the lens is, and what condition it is in. The 500 f4 can go for as little as $2,500 to as much as $10,000 with vr, while the 600 f4 can go anywhere from $2,900 to a little over $12,000 used.
On the other hand the new Nikon 120-300 is about $9,500 without a 1.4 converter and the new sigma 120-300 f2.8 with a converter is about $4,700. It's under $3,600 without the converter.
There is no one right answer. It just depends on what you are shooting and how much money you can afford.
The other thing to look at if you are shooting sports is that a second body really helps. Example shooting football and they come to your sideline then a second body with a 24-70 or a 70-200 to go with a big prime is really helpful.
I have the sigma sport 150-600 which works great for daylight sports, but isn't fast enough for either the football field or gym I shoot the most in, but if you are shooting in daylight, it is another option. And, with the 1.4 converter it goes to f8 at 840mm and it will still autofocus in good sunlight, at least with a D5 or D6.