AF-S NIKKOR 70-300MM 4.5-5.6 VR LENS
Dec 16, 2018 07:42:39 #
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
Dec 16, 2018 07:50:21 #
OZMON wrote:
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I have one that I was just getting ready to post in the for-Sale section. If you decide that you want one I will give you a deal as I no longer have a Nikon camera and have no use for it. PM me if you have any interest. Thanks, Charles
Dec 16, 2018 08:21:45 #
OZMON wrote:
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I have had one for a good many years. It is my go to lens for hand held walk around wildlife shots. I use it on my d7200 and d750 cameras. Not too heavy.
Dec 16, 2018 08:36:11 #
I've had one for quite a few years and am very happy with it. It is my most used 70 and up zoom. I also have the 70-200 2.8 FL but it is way too heavy for general daily carry around use, it is reserved for special times when the 2.8 is desired. I've done some A/B comparisons with mine and while I can see enough differences (by looking very closely) to keep the FL lens, if I could only have one, it would be the 70-300.
Dec 16, 2018 08:37:37 #
I believe that is the older version, rated good up to about 200mm, and fair from there to 300mm. Its replacement, designated as a P series, has received excellent reviews and is considered sharp all the way out to 300mm.
Dec 16, 2018 08:42:17 #
I have been using this lens for about six years and have found it to do an excellent job. I have used it on both a D80 then a D7100. My most significant uses of it were for wildlife and sports (mainly snow skiing competition at the Summit County 50+ Games each Feb.). It has always provided very sharp photos.
Dec 16, 2018 08:42:43 #
It is a great lens, versatile and sharp. AF is fast and it will serve you well.
Dec 16, 2018 08:58:40 #
OZMON wrote:
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
It's an ok lens. But if you could stretch your budget to be able to justify the AF-P FX version - you'd be one happy puppy.
Dec 16, 2018 08:59:08 #
A
I have heard so much good about the 70-200 2.8 FL that I am surprised you would choose the 70-300 over it.
1963mca wrote:
I've had one for quite a few years and am very happy with it. It is my most used 70 and up zoom. I also have the 70-200 2.8 FL but it is way too heavy for general daily carry around use, it is reserved for special times when the 2.8 is desired. I've done some A/B comparisons with mine and while I can see enough differences (by looking very closely) to keep the FL lens, if I could only have one, it would be the 70-300.
I have heard so much good about the 70-200 2.8 FL that I am surprised you would choose the 70-300 over it.
Dec 16, 2018 09:06:12 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
I have one. Found the VR useful. If there is any lack of sharpness between 200~300, PP can resolve this. Never worried me though.
Dec 16, 2018 09:08:23 #
OZMON wrote:
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
OZMOND, I have this lens for several years now, having used it on my old Nikon D-80 and recently on my D-300 that I use as backup to my D-750. I find it a very useful lens, not heavy and quite sharp all all zoom settings.
Below is a link to a photo I posted yesterday.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-568934-1.html
Dec 16, 2018 09:25:51 #
I have seen some tout the AF-P version of this lens as more desirable than the one your asking about. Let me encourage you to do apply due diligence. The AF-P version has limitations as to which Nikon cameras it will work on. Nikon has this AF-P version for $149.95 full retail presently. They are trying to unload this inferior lens as sales have not met their expectations. The AF-S version is $499.95 from Nikon. Quality between the two is evident by the price and result. I've owned the AF-S version for years and was tempted by the price of the AF-P but after trying one and noticing the differences I was convinced NOT to change. However, if you want what the AF-P offers which is a very low price and are not concerned about other elements of photography then go for it.
Dec 16, 2018 10:00:28 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
A
I have heard so much good about the 70-200 2.8 FL that I am surprised you would choose the 70-300 over it.
I have heard so much good about the 70-200 2.8 FL that I am surprised you would choose the 70-300 over it.
If I was 40 years younger and able to carry a D850 with the 70-200 2.8 FL along with my 16-35 and 28-70 2.8 (which is the normally attached lens) all day long, I would take the 70-200 over the 70-300 anytime. However at my age that combo (body and three lens) is just too heavy for full time day to day carry. The 70-300 is that much lighter to make a difference. I don't expect to get stronger as I get any older so I'm just saying IF I could only have ONE 70-xxx lens it would be the 70-300. At this point I keep the 70-200 stored in a case with my other lens and take whatever I need out when I have some specific purpose in mind. Don't anyone tell me I should be changing to a mirrorless, I ain't that weak yet. Been using SLRs/DSLRs for 60 some years and not ready to change. A Dinosaur? Yes, I don't even have a cell phone so don't know, or care, what all the fuss is about with cameras in phones.
Dec 16, 2018 10:37:51 #
Dec 16, 2018 11:45:05 #
OZMON wrote:
I am thinking of buying this lens, has anyone got any experience with this lens, and is it any good.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
I don't have a good zoom lens which I sometimes find I need.
An important piece of information is needed before a good recommendation could be made. What camera would you be using the lens on? Nikon has two recently released 70-300 lenses. One for the DX cameras and another for FX cameras. Both of these are designated with a "P" which stands for pulsed stepping motor. The one for DX is of lesser build quality and of course it is less expensive. (It has not had it's priced lowered because of poor sales. It was introduced at a low price point.) The other lens for FX cameras is selling around $600 US and has had a myriad of good reviews. Here are two
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikkor-zoom-lens-reviews/nikon-70-300mm-f45-63-af-p.html
https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-70-300mm-vr-af-p
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.