AF Nikkor 70-300mm D lens vs. Af Nikkor 75-300 D lens

[Ironwood]

When I first got my 70-300VR, my other lenses were the 18-55 and 55-200. The 55-200 was put in the cupboard and I only used the 18-55 and 70-300, I didn't miss having the gap from 55-70 covered.
So you probably could also sell the 35-105 if it comes to the crunch, depends how much you like that lens I guess.

I am glad you aren't getting the 70-300D or 75-300, as I think you were only going to set yourself up for a dissapointment. I saw how you improved using the 55-200 in your thread, I think when you get the 70-300VR you will quickly forget the pain of having to wait and save.

 

[mikew_RIP]

Fully understand your answer Mike,that' why the sigma is in my lens list and not the Nikon 80-400 ,what about a refurbished 55-300 you then get VR,mine was a grey import about £200.of course the up side to one of the lenses you mention is at the right price you get to check 300mm before your keep purchase.

 

[Mike D90]

Fully understand your answer Mike, that's why the Sigma is in my lens list and not the Nikon 80-400. What about a refurbished 55-300mm? you then get VR,mine was a grey import about £200.

It may be unfounded but I am not a huge fan of tele lenses that cover a very broad range. Even though 55-300mm isn't that much more than the 70-300mm I think I will stick with the 70-300mm VR lens.

If I could I would get a 200-300mm or 200-400mm and keep the 55-200mm in my bag but I don't think Nikon covers that focal length, at least, not in a lens I could ever afford. At any rate, the 55-200mm will be sold in a few days so it's a gonner now.

 

[Mike D90]

. . . . you probably could also sell the 35-105 if it comes to the crunch, depends how much you like that lens I guess.

I am kind of fond of that lens. It takes good sharp images and is a little faster than the other lenses I have. I would like to try it on some portraits and see how it performs.

 

[Ironwood]

Only you fully know your needs and circumstances, so when it comes down to it, the choice is all yours. But by bouncing ideas around hopefully we can help you make an informed choice.

 

[Mike D90]

Only you fully know your needs and circumstances, so when it comes down to it, the choice is all yours. But by bouncing ideas around hopefully we can help you make an informed choice.

My needs and circumstances change all the time!

I like the ideas coming. If I could be convinced third party lenses are as good as Nikkor lenses I would look at Sigma or Tamron. I think though that the aftermarket lenses cost too much when you go to find their top shelf quality lenses.

 

[dramtastic]

I'll put my Siggy 100-300mm F4 up against the Nikon 300mm F4 on the same body any day of the week for a lot less money! :cocksure:

 

[Rick M]

If I were in your position I would buy the Tamron 70-300 VC. It is on par with the Nikon and about $450 new I believe. Some review sites give the Tamron a higher grade, I like the way Tamron VC locks on the image.

 

[Mike D90]

Thanks for the heads up. I just don't trust my judgement of aftermarket lenses. I have almost no experience with any of them.

 

[skene]

You should take a trip to your local camera store and try out different lenses. Then make judgements then.
I've tried and owned several Tamron lenses and have yet to be disappointed in their quality. I have tried out Sigmas and I am equally impressed by their lenses and what they have to offer.
Not every good lens comes from Nikon.

However it is like trying new things. You'll never know if you will like it if you never gave it a chance and try it.

 

[Rick M]

You should take a trip to your local camera store and try out different lenses. Then make judgements then.
I've tried and owned several Tamron lenses and have yet to be disappointed in their quality. I have tried out Sigmas and I am equally impressed by their lenses and what they have to offer.
Not every good lens comes from Nikon.

However it is like trying new things. You'll never know if you will like it if you never gave it a chance and try it.

Excellent advice!

​The Sigma 35mm1.4 was my first 3rd party lens and it is now the one I use the most. They have all come a long way in the past few years and some of the new Tamrons/Sigmas are even better than Nikon.

 

[Rick M]

Thanks for the heads up. I just don't trust my judgement of aftermarket lenses. I have almost no experience with any of them.

Tamron and Sigma are not in business to be a substitute for Nikon, they are here to compete against them. It's not like you are buying a substandard replacement part for your car. In the past, they were usually not as good, but some of the new products rival Nikon. Research/evaluate/judge lenses on an individual basis, you may be very surprised by what you find.

 

[dramtastic]

Although I'm not changing my view that in this case a 70-300mm Nikkor is the way to go, in as far as 3rd party lenses are concerned, I do believe they have come a long way in a short period of time and that those who have formerly dismissed them might want to put away their biases. I now some folks have had bad experiences previously but many just dismiss third party lenses without ever having given them a crack.
Up until only 5 years ago I would never have touched a KIA or a Hyundai. Today they offer a real alternative to the quality of Japanese cars and stylish as well. That's how fast the game can change.

 

[hark]

B&H has a used Nikon 70-300mm VR in stock--don't know if the price is good for you, but $349.95 isn't too bad. I'm not sure of their policy for a warranty on a used item, but I would guess there is some type of limited warranty.

This one is rated a 9. They also have one rated as an 8.5 for the same price....

 

[weebee]

Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX VR Lens - Refurbished by Nikon USA 2197 B