charles brown Loc: Tennesse

After reading all the responses to my original post I took another set of pictures, this time using the suggestions made. The results are a good news, bad news kind of thing. The good news is that the sharpness of the lens being tested (DX, AF-S Nikkor 55-300mm, 4.5-5.6 G ED) is not as bad as I had originally thought. The bad news is that it still isn't as sharp as I had hoped it would be. Some improvements in sharpness, however, were achieved in PP. Inasmuch as the lens was not that expensive I would have to say that one gets what they pay for. Of course, to think that it would be as sharp as a five digit prime lens was foolishness on my part. But hey, I still believe in Santa, the Easter bunny, and the good fairy. Oh, the camera used for all the tests was the Nikon D3300. And they are still underexposed so need to solve that issue. Want to again say Thank You to all who took the time to read my post and offer suggestions.

warrior Loc: Paso Robles CA

Its all in the Glass

ggttc Loc: TN

Don't get discouraged...I had a 55-300 for years on a d5200...Its capable of sharp images...keep practicing

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I don't recall the original post, but were you shooting in raw (NEF)? If so, sharpening is required, not optional.

WilliamCap Loc: Michigan

I have this same lens and find that for the money it takes good pics. Better with monopod or tri-pod as this lens is a little heavy. I still like it and plan to keep it, as my grandkids are into a lot of sports and this takes good pics with the above mentioned and the right exposure levels and lens opening. Good luck and have fun, remember, your pics are what YOU LIKE not the whole world.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Original post is here:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-394153-1.html

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I will say that any modern lens today is capable of very fine images. They all perform to perfection when we do our part.
Some lenses are better than others, we all know that. You cannot compare your lens to let's say a 24-120 f4 VR (FX lens) because the latter is better built and has better performance.
Many times small modifications to the techniques we use result in a dramatic performance when it comes to sharpness.

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

I use a 55-300 its an ok lens, but not great, Ive used a friends nikon 18-300 that takes really sharp pics on my 5200. , You can buy a 55-300 in the 250 to $300 range a 18 to 300 is more than double. The 55-300 pics are much better on my d810 but Like you said, you get what you pay for

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Just remember that zoom lenses are a series of compromises. Normally at their best midway thru the zoom & aperture ranges. Better quality lenses will have fewer compromises, but still won't match primes at different focal lengths. That said, many "Pro" level zooms will be sharp enough that one would be hard pressed to discern differences with an image taken with a prime lens at the same focal length. Simply look at DxO Mark ratings & you will see that primes hold the lead. Problem with DxO Mark is that they are all bench test results & real world shooting is an entirely different animal.

TucsonCoyote Loc: Tucson AZ

I'm glad to see that someone would mention this detail !