Nikon lens
Jul 4, 2017 12:45:16 #
Jul 4, 2017 13:09:48 #
It's a competent performer. It's what I use for that focal length. I would love the f/2.8 lens, but it's above my pay grade. You did fine. Both of these were taken with it.
Jul 4, 2017 13:39:55 #
I find this strange question to ask when you have already bought it and have it. I assume you've taken it out and used it. The only opinion at this point, since you already bought it, that matters is yours. What do you think of the shots?
Jul 4, 2017 13:57:05 #
wmurnahan wrote:
I find this strange question to ask when you have already bought it and have it. I assume you've taken it out and used it. The only opinion at this point, since you already bought it, that matters is yours. What do you think of the shots?
I was basically going to say the same thing. You already have the lens, others opinions don't much matter at this point.
I do have that lens. It was one of my first Nikon lenses, probably the second one I bought. It's an ok lens but I rarely use it anymore. I prefer the 28-300; I find it far more versatile. The one lens to have when you are carrying only one.
Jul 4, 2017 14:05:43 #
wmurnahan wrote:
I find this strange question to ask when you have already bought it and have it. I assume you've taken it out and used it. The only opinion at this point, since you already bought it, that matters is yours. What do you think of the shots?
Not so much. We have all heard of buyer's remorse. He bought a lens and now wonders if he made a wise choice. Nothing wrong with needing a little reassurance.
Jul 4, 2017 15:13:43 #
Haven't used it yet, still in box, I got it at a very low price just wasn't sure if it's a good lens
Jul 4, 2017 15:25:24 #
flipflopman wrote:
Haven't used it yet, still in box, I got it at a very low price just wasn't sure if it's a good lens
It's a good lens. It's not the f/2.8, but the price tag told you that. I have a question for you: what color are the letters VR on your lens? Gold or red?
Jul 4, 2017 16:15:10 #
Jul 4, 2017 16:44:51 #
flipflopman wrote:
It's gold
OK, so you have the older version of Vibration Reduction. I wouldn't worry about it—I personally would not sell your lens just to get the later version of VR. That might be why you got such a good price. I think what you need to do is mount that lens, and go shoot with it. Let us know what you think. Best of luck!
Jul 5, 2017 06:24:24 #
Jul 5, 2017 06:25:23 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
flipflopman wrote:
Just purchased a Nikon AF70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens would like your opinion on this lens
You did not make a mistake buying this lens, but ANY lens is only as good as the photographers skill level. So, start growing grasshopper. Go out into the world and start taking pictures today, unpack that sucker and start shooting.
Jul 5, 2017 07:36:37 #
That's my walk around lens on my D5300.
Its light and preforms well.
Its light and preforms well.
Jul 5, 2017 08:52:02 #
RSQRD
Loc: SW Florida
The 70 to 300mm red VR is a remarkable lens for the price. It outshines other Nikon lens that are twice + in price, Go take pics
Jul 5, 2017 11:24:07 #
Tigger1
Loc: Surrey, BC Canada
flipflopman wrote:
Just purchased a Nikon AF70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens would like your opinion on this lens
Are we all discussing the same lens? The OP listed the lens as Nikon AF 70-300mm f 4-5.6 G, which closely but not exactly describes Nikon's 2003 release of the Nikon 70-300mm F4-5.6 ED AF lens listed on Nikon USA wesite as available for $175.00.
There is also the 2006 released 70-300mm f4.5-5.6G IF ED VR lens at approximately $500.00 and then there are two recently released (2016) Nikon AF-P 70-300mm f4.5-6.3 ED lenses, one with VR and one without VR. Buyers of either of these last two lenses should be aware that they are not always compativble with all of the Nikon camera bodies.
Strictly based on the OP's original lens description and comment that he purchased at a cheap price makes one wonder if he is talking about the 2003 released lens, the 70-300 f4-5.6 ED AF non VR lens?
Jul 5, 2017 11:28:21 #
Tigger1
Loc: Surrey, BC Canada
Rab-Eye wrote:
It's a competent performer. It's what I use for that focal length. I would love the f/2.8 lens, but it's above my pay grade. You did fine. Both of these were taken with it.
I like my Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 AF-S IF ED VR (red) lens and would really like to by the same lens in a constant 2.8 aperture model. But, to the best of my knowledge there is no such version available from Nikon. Does anyone know of a 70-300mm constant aperture lens by any manufacturer with a Nikon F mount?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.