Re-considering the 70-300 f/4.5 IF-ED-VR

C

Claudia!

Senior Member
Over the summer I purchases this lens but returned it due to dust issues within the inside of the lens. I liked the reach of the lens but was too distracted by the dust to really get the best out of it. In my opinion, it was a lemon. I gave it the best chance I could under the circumstances but could did not give it a great chance. I obviously returned it due to all the issues I had with it. Months later, I miss the zoom. I feel limited at times to go out and be adventurous in my photo walks. I love primes. I own the 35, 50 and 85 1.8g and the Tokina 11-16 II. The 85 (127mm I believe) is the longest reach I have. I am looking to purchase this lens again but I am not extremely excited about it because of the issues I had with my copy of it. I made a post about my issues, if you'd like to read. (original post months ago: http://nikonites.com/telephoto/17127-issues-70-300-f-4-5-if-ed-vr.html#axzz2z7zF38nS)

From what I remember, these were the cons (aside from the dust): It was not too sharp past 200, a bit of Chromatic Aberration and heavy for my small hands. The weight isn't as big of an issue because I can control it with my tripod and monopod.

Pros: the length, the colors, AF was decent, VR (when needed) and so on.

I want a zoom but I want to make sure I get the best bang for my buck. I have about $800.00 to spend including taxes and warranty. I plan to move to at the end of the year. I don't see any other lens within my price range that will give me what I want. I wish I could get the 70-200 2.8 but financially, it is not ideal until at least a year. I love my primes and will use those first before the zoom but a good zoom is something I do want.

If you own the 70-300, what is your personal opinion of it?
If not the 70-300, which would you suggest?

Thank you!
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
Claudia! said:
Over the summer I purchases this lens but returned it due to dust issues within the inside of the lens. I liked the reach of the lens but was too distracted by the dust to really get the best out of it. In my opinion, it was a lemon. I gave it the best chance I could under the circumstances but could did not give it a great chance. I obviously returned it due to all the issues I had with it. Months later, I miss the zoom. I feel limited at times to go out and be adventurous in my photo walks. I love primes. I own the 35, 50 and 85 1.8g and the Tokina 11-16 II. The 85 (127mm I believe) is the longest reach I have. I am looking to purchase this lens again but I am not extremely excited about it because of the issues I had with my copy of it. I made a post about my issues, if you'd like to read. (original post months ago: http://nikonites.com/telephoto/17127-issues-70-300-f-4-5-if-ed-vr.html#axzz2z7zF38nS)

From what I remember, these were the cons (aside from the dust): It was not too sharp past 200, a bit of Chromatic Aberration and heavy for my small hands. The weight isn't as big of an issue because I can control it with my tripod and monopod.

Pros: the length, the colors, AF was decent, VR (when needed) and so on.

I want a zoom but I want to make sure I get the best bang for my buck. I have about $800.00 to spend including taxes and warranty. I plan to move to at the end of the year. I don't see any other lens within my price range that will give me what I want. I wish I could get the 70-200 2.8 but financially, it is not ideal until at least a year. I love my primes and will use those first before the zoom but a good zoom is something I do want.

If you own the 70-300, what is your personal opinion of it?
If not the 70-300, which would you suggest?

Thank you!
Click to expand...

I may can contribute a little bit but the 70-300mm VR IF ED is my longest lens, it is my only VR lens, and I have never owned anything else in its class or above its class.

I use it primarily for birds, small and large, in flight and static.

I do agree with you that it has some issues above 200mm with IQ but, if properly exposed, I find it minimal.

I find it to be slow AF and I wish many times it was a lot faster. That is my biggest gripe with this lens.

It definitely shows some CA particularly when I shoot a bird shot against branches that contain a lot of dark areas. I usually do not see the CA when the background is brighter and I love its bokeh.

I don't care for the lens when used at its max aperture usually but I rarely use the lens at anything under 150mm so that might be different at shorter focal lengths.

I never use the VR so that is a non issue for me at this time and the weight is no issue for me either.

While I cannot recommend another lens from experience I would say I wish for a longer lens most of the time. Length is just out of my budget. But I do love this lens and my copy has been dust free, or at least, dust free as I need. The lens certainly is more capable than I am for sure.


great_egret_6.jpg


sea_gull.jpg
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
I have used a fellow birders set up. A D200 and the Tamron 70-300 VC. The Tamron lens is no slouch. Has a great focus motor, the VC is just outstanding. And at 300mm I would say sharper than the Nikon. Not as much contrast as the Nikon tho. Colors pop a bit more from the Nikon, but it is nothing a little PP can't fix. All in all the Tamron is right up there, if not better, than the Nikon.
 
C

Claudia!

Senior Member
I was considering the Tamron as well. The price is less which is always a plus. I am in no rush to purchase one at the moment but before I do, I want to make sure I make the right purchase. Is the tamron heavy? I plan to go to my local camera store next week and compare the options I come up with. I forgot to include my reasons for a zoom. I mainly want to capture my 4 year old nieces baseball game. I use the original 70-300 that I purchased at a football game. I actually was surprised by it in a good way. Aside from my nieces games, I will have it for regular zoo trips, birds and random photo walks. It won't be my go to lens but I still feel a need for it.

Thank you everyone for your input.
 
M

Mike D90

Senior Member
Claudia! said:
I was considering the Tamron as well. The price is less which is always a plus. I am in no rush to purchase one at the moment but before I do, I want to make sure I make the right purchase. Is the tamron heavy? I plan to go to my local camera store next week and compare the options I come up with. I forgot to include my reasons for a zoom. I mainly want to capture my 4 year old nieces baseball game. I use the original 70-300 that I purchased at a football game. I actually was surprised by it in a good way. Aside from my nieces games, I will have it for regular zoo trips, birds and random photo walks. It won't be my go to lens but I still feel a need for it.

Thank you everyone for your input.
Click to expand...

As long as those baseball games are in daylight the Nikon 70-300mm will work just fine. It certainly is not a good, or even very useable, night lens for sports.

Not sure what it costs but have you looked at the 80-400mm? Probably has a huge price though.
 
C

Claudia!

Senior Member
@mike, for the most part, the games are around 6pm. I just hate the price! Though it is within my price range, I still don't feel that the quality I received from it merits how much it is with taxes and warranty. Still a hard choice and I need to keep looking.
 
C

Claudia!

Senior Member
Well.... I bought it! I went and compared them at the Houston Camera Exchange. I tend to side with best buy a lot due to their warranty. The gift cards and reward points helped reduce the price even lower than the Tamron. Best buy doesnt carry the Tamron one. I saved more going with Best Buy. I compared it with the Tamron at another camera store and sided with the Nikon version. The one they had at best buy was in brand new condition. It was nothing compared to what I had experienced months back. I feel like this time I have a good copy of it. I will be testing it out more throughout the week. Hopefully I made the right choice. Once again, thank you all who replied and gave their insight. I am glad I was able to test it out and compare others within it's range.
 
C

Claudia!

Senior Member
I am hopeful that this time around I will. It's obviously not good in low light but that is why I will lean on my primes when need be. I am still a prime girl at heart.
 
C

Claudia!

Senior Member
I tested out the lens today while downtown. I must say, this is a great lens. I am convinced I really did get a Lemon the first time around. The quality and everything all around is so much better. I am glad I returned that one and waited until I found one in great condition, as it should be since it is new. I have the battle re-enactment next weekend so I am excited to use it there. It's my favorite outing of the year. :)
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
And well, for low light, you simply won't beat a better sensor body. Good glass will help you see the limits of the body, but once you feel the need to reach past that, there's but only one solution.
 
Top