Will this lens would work better for indoor sports under not so great lighting than a 55-200 VR 4-5.6 on a D3100?
1351158
I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a real jewel to own. I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a... » Read More I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a real jewel to own. « Show Less
1351159
Yes, but you will loose the ability to be close up to the action. I would keep the 55-200mm and adjust your ISO settings on the camera instead.
1351160
Since the effective focal length of this lens on D3100 is 36 -127.5mm, it is better to use 55-200 for a better zoom; Rest both the lenses have the minimum aperture of 4.5 and 5.6 at farthest focal length, which doesn't make a drastic difference. Use a higher ISO for freezing the action of the sports!
1351161
I own this lens and use it for good general snaps. If I were shooting indoors looking for the best result I would have a 20-35 2.8, a 501.8 and an 80-200 2.8
1351162
I do not thinki would recommend this lens. ... especially if you cannot use flash
1351163
No. de 3100 ISO is not that great, and, without proper lighting, there is not too much you can do. With a 3.5 at 24mm and a 4.5 at 85mm, you'll need a powerful body (D750, D800, D610) that can use a proper ISO that compensates the lack of light going through the lens.
1351164
I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera. If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a real jewel to own.
759249
My brother has loan his 50 1.4 to me. I like. I may get the 24-70 2.8 - we get so many positives about it. Use the 24-70 indoors and the 4f lens where there is good light??Thanks for your suggestions.
33403
If yours came with the 18-55mm AF AV lense then it should. With the AV featured turned on vibration is minimal. My hands a failing so I went with the D3100-I can't really see shaking. I am not a pro. If you get it enjoy. This is the lense of choice on my Nikon; it starts where the 1st lense leaves off and gives very good telephoto capability.
941932
I've used it for taking baseball photos with my D700 and just like everyone has said it is VERY slow to focus. However if you shoot during the daylight it can work if you up your frame rate. The D700 can shoot 8fps to compensate but if you pre-focus and anticipate the action it also helps. If your gonna shoot indoor your SOL.
1429331
Yes, I have used this lens for all of those purposes and it performs well. Although you might want the faster f2.8 lens if the indoor performances don't have adequate lighting. I have not regretted buying this lens at all.
759740
Ana, I've had this lens for about a year now I think. I use it with my D3100 as an everyday-walk-in-the-park lens. I like just about everything about it-- the color is perfect, pictures are perfectly clear, the VR works perfectly. The only reason I might warn folks off it is the lens distortion at either end of its telephoto range. For that reason, I mostly stick to the center of that range and just use other lenses for wide angle or long range shots.
1319767
I'm not an expert just a photo hobby guy. But i believe there might be a second generation image stabilization on the 300 mm lens. Plus the obvious better zoom capacity. My 200 does a pretty good job at getting indoor pictures at a basketball game. I have to set the right aperture and ISO at first but it works for me. Depends on your need for the additional zoom. Good luck
1409346
I have not but if this is your main reason for the camera I would not get this one. I noticed it does not have a sports setting. Also it depends on the environment you are shooting in, bright outdoors it will probably be okay but it has a small lens and sensor so i would not want to use it indoors. Also distance is important...closer the better.
1945788
Yes, it is. It will get you close to the action and will still allow you to be able to move around for better views and better angles. As others have already pointed out, the Nikon 300mm f/2.8G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Super Telephoto Prime Lens will perform better in low light but with a hefty price tag and also a loss of mobility due to the increased size and weight.
1429330
I think it would work great for that. The optics are amazing...I took it on a safari and got some amazing photos. The only concern I could potentially see you having is the stop if you are shooting indoors. They make one that opens up further, however it is nearly double the price. I don't typically shoot low light, so I can't give you any advice here. I found it to be a pretty incredible lens.
986527
Yes it works great on my d800....fantastic for indoor sports...or outdoor for that matter...the lens is very heavy and works best with a tripod....
2148233
I've taken some nice shots of football players with this lense, but they were day games. It's a bit dark when fully extended (300mm), but if your camera handles ISO's of 400 - 800 well, it can be used. IMHO, it's as good as any in this price range. Idealy you would want a faster lense for sports, and that speed will cost you.
795054
This lens is great for bright daylight sport photography. Although it is a constant aperture F4 lens, it may not be fast enough (i.e. collect enough light to keep your shutter speed high) to be able to stop sports motion. Also the image stabilizer will not help you to stop motion, it is only designed to prevent camera shake which it does well. Keep in mind the other comparable lens is the significantly more expensive EF 70-200 2.8L but it is 1 stop faster (i.e. doubles your shutter speed or you can lower your ISO). So it is possible to take good sports photography with this lens but you'll need to crank up your ISO but 1 stop more than you normally would with a F2.8 lens. This is especially true with the newer camera sensors where you can crank up the ISO without much of a noise penalty.
260473
Not sure what your camera came with, but I use a AF5 Nikkor18-55mm for almost all indoor shots and they are great! I love my camera and have just about every lens you can have.
1993785
For indoor sports photography you would be better off with a lens with a larger aperture (a smaller "f" number).
795052
This lens is fantastic for daylight sports photography but is going to be much weaker in low light situations than the 2.8 versions. In my particular situation I use a crop-frame camera so I'm especially handicapped in low light. My last attempt was photographing a nighttime car race with stadium lighting. Maybe 1 in 10 shots were satisfactory unless I shot on corners where the cars were slowed down significantly.
2014354
I brought this Lens as a starter for my new GH4. this lens works great on my GH4 and I have now recently picked up a 20 mm 1.7 that's fantastic for indoor/low light