What's ur thoughts on a nikon 70-300mm af-s lens?

B

Bodega

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
159
Hey guys, was in jhb last week and was using the 55-200mm lens for some zoom shots and it was crap. So while walking aroung i decided to get the 70-300mm. I paid 5k for it and it seems far better than the other 1. for now i have the 18-105mm, 50mm 1.4s (MY FAV) and now the 70-300mm. Was that a decent buy i made. i wont need futher zoom thats for sure, well at least for a while. what are ur thoughts? Also remember i didnt wanna break the bank either.
 
G

g0nt4du

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
600
Its an excellent lens for that zoom range. The closest option to it is the tamron 70-300 60th aniversary edition. Obviously being a Nikon its got a much higher resale value as well!
 
F

fvdbergh

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
703
Bodega said:
... and now the 70-300mm. Was that a decent buy i made. i wont need futher zoom thats for sure, well at least for a while. what are ur thoughts?\
Click to expand...

Incidentally, I also got myself the 70-300 mm last month. I have probably used it for less than 8 hours (about 5 or so occasions), so this counts as my initial impressions:

1. Impressive sharpness and accurate AF at 70 mm (for the price, of course)
2. No complaints about maximum sharpness at 300 mm (yes, it is sharper at < 200 mm, just like every single review will tell you) --- again, fine for the price.
3. Noticably worse AF performance at 300 mm. This is probably due to the f/5.6 max aperture at this focal length. Seems to be better in really bright light, but AF seems to have high variability (random error) in lower light (e.g., less light than required for ISO 100 @ 1/100 s @ f/5.6). I plan on testing this a bit more rigorously, but I suspect only the cross-type AF sensors on the D7000 are really suitable at 300 mm, i.e., resort to focus-and-recompose technique.
4. It really burns through my camera's battery when VR is on. I will have to get a spare battery now ...
5. Minimum focus distance is a tad too far. Would have been nice to focus down to 1 m (but read up about floating lens elements and you will forgive the lens designers .... )

Overall, I am pleased with this lens. It feels much quicker and sharper than the 55-200 mm VR, but maybe this is just post-purchase justification kicking in :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top