nikon 18-200 f3.5 or 70-300 f4.0 for track and field.

[Badcast]

I want to shoot a track and field event this spring and I would like some input. Its during the day so light should not be to much of a factor as far as very low light. I want to buy a nice tele and I am on a budget, well thats what my wife said anyway.I can't afford a 2.8 so thats out. I've been looking at the 18-200 f3.5 and the 70-300 f4.5 both have the VRll. I have a 85mm f1.8 but no zoom tele. My question is at the long end range of these 2 will I have a fast enough shutter speed to stop motion 1/500 or faster without blowing up my iso. If someone could tell me the settings they use and the results I could make a better informed decision. I'm using a Nikon D90. Also I have good access on the field so I could use the 85 if I had to but a zoom would save my legs and help with less croping.

Randy

[RLucas]

I have no first hand experience with the 18-200, but I do have the 70-300VR. I have actually used it very little. I did some motorsport shots with it, and a portrait session, and am really pleased with it.
I have heard mixed reviews on the 18-200. It has a couple of sweet spots, but the big drawback for me was the moustache (barrell/pincushion at the same time) distortion that I have heard more than one person complain about.
With the 70-300, focus hunt seems to be a concern, but if you have enough light, that shouldn't be much of on issue. Haven't had it yet with mine. Also, at the higher tele end, above 200mm, it seems to be a little soft, but it's something I can live with.
Do you already have a lens in the 18-70 range? If so, I would say go with the 70-300VR. The optics are really good for a lens at that price point.

[IABoomer]

For outdoor meets, you should be able to do well with something below the 70-200 f/2.8. I borrowed a friend's D40 with an older manual focus 70-210 push-pull that was f/4-5.6 and was able to shoot ISO 200, f/8, 1/320 during a daytime track meet.

With the D90's better sensor, you could easily get to 1/500 with little noise even at f/5.6. There were a few times that I would have liked to get some shots of the back of the track that the 210mm just wasn't reaching, so if I had to get one lens, the 70-300 would probably be my pick (assuming you have something to cover shorter focal lengths already).

[RLucas]

Originally Posted by IABoomer

For outdoor meets, you should be able to do well with something below the 70-200 f/2.8. I borrowed a friend's D40 with an older manual focus 70-210 push-pull that was f/4-5.6 and was able to shoot ISO 200, f/8, 1/320 during a daytime track meet.

With the D90's better sensor, you could easily get to 1/500 with little noise even at f/5.6. There were a few times that I would have liked to get some shots of the back of the track that the 210mm just wasn't reaching, so if I had to get one lens, the 70-300 would probably be my pick (assuming you have something to cover shorter focal lengths already).

I have that particular push/pull lens. It is a great lens from what I can tell. It came with my D70 when I bought it used. I have used it quite a bit, and really like it. Sorry... Off topic.

[OsmosisStudios]

I think the 70-300 VR would a better bet. keep in mind though, it isn't an f/4.5: its an f/4.5-5.6. So you lose a stop at 300mm. It's still very good, especially outdoors, and you'll likely not have any problems.

[kirbinster]

+1 on the 70-300VR, it is much sharper.

[Badcast]

Thank you very much for your imput, after doing a search to get more info I found quite a few posts that helped also. Being new to the forum I can't believe how much info DPS has to give and how helpful the members are. Thanks again!

Randy

[ravncat]

You can probably also find 80-200 2.8s in good condition used for less than a new 18-200. Just an FYI

[sk66]

70-300, or something even longer if you're not going to be on the field.