Nikon Lenses 200mm or 300mm

[graemelee]

I am after a Nikon lens for kids sport and footy photos.Do you think a 200mm will do the job as I will only be 10 to 30 metres away from subjects? or should I go for the 300mm?
I have seen a 300mm AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR for $300 and the NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G AF-S DX VR IF-ED for $170.
Are these decent pricing?

Thanks

[Wayne]

Pricing for the 55-200 is about right, the 55-300 is overpriced I feel.

Neither of these lenses can be used with a teleconverter, so the 300mm focal length is all you will get (450mm on DX). Both are quite slow, and unless light is fair to really good, auto focus may be slow or even hard to lock on. Backgrounds will be reasonably in focus throughout the zoom range except for close to minimum focus distance. The 300mm is your better option IMHO.

They are kit lenses and while great for general shooting, they are not fantastic sports lenses. The price of entry however is quite good if you just want a bit more reach.

[kiwi]

Go for a 2nd hand sigma 70-200 f/2.8 hsm you can swing it, usually $6-700 or so

[Cheryl A]

Graeme, it depends on what other lenses you have already. I find the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens to be a great all-rounder and I love it. New they are just under $1,000 but you can get a used one for around US$560 on Amazon.com. It really is worth the expense, IMO.

A new Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS (Optical Stabilizer) Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras is US$399 on Amazon.com - just to give you an idea of price variances.

I would read the full specs on any lens you are considering and weigh up what you will use it for, or what you might want to use it for going forward.

I hope this helps.