Time to upgrade!

Moab Man

Senior Member
It does. If you were shooting closer in then a 35mm or 50mm prime lens would be great, but you want reach so the 70-300 is right up your alley. If you can do it financially here is my perfect world scenario. D7100 because it has an additional crop ability that essentially doubles your zoom. Then I would pair it with the 70-300 because its great glass but a bit expensive. Otherwise the 55-300. Not quite as good but easier on the wallet.
 
I already own a 35mm f 1.8. Its my favorite lens that I own. Now, would the 55-300mm be just like the 55-200 but with a longer reach? And I strongly dislike my 55-200... I think that a 70-200 f 4 is the goal but that's quite expensive... so for now I think that I could get a D7100 and a 70-300mm NIKKOR. But, I need to sell my D3100 and I would need to buy both refurbished....
 

riverside

Senior Member
I already own a 35mm f 1.8. Its my favorite lens that I own. Now, would the 55-300mm be just like the 55-200 but with a longer reach? And I strongly dislike my 55-200... I think that a 70-200 f 4 is the goal but that's quite expensive... so for now I think that I could get a D7100 and a 70-300mm NIKKOR. But, I need to sell my D3100 and I would need to buy both refurbished....

You might want to consider the Tamron 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD. $349 (after $100 rebate) with six year guarantee. Many reviews place it as sharper than the Nikon at longer focal lengths (which is why I decided on the Tamron over the Nikon).
 

riverside

Senior Member
I have a problem with buying used electronics of any type, cameras included. Others do so with no problems and some have nightmare purchases. I prefer peace of mind.
 

Mycenius

Senior Member
You might want to consider the Tamron 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 Di VC USD. $349 (after $100 rebate) with six year guarantee. Many reviews place it as sharper than the Nikon at longer focal lengths (which is why I decided on the Tamron over the Nikon).

I've just ordered the Tamron for this reason... Really wanted a 70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 but couldn't justify the cost, and the f/2.8 would have been too big & heavy comparatively for me. The Tamron is cheaper than the Nikon, f/4 vs. f/4.5, & sharper arguably only at the cost of 'feeling' a little more plasticky, so was a no brainier for me! :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

AC016

Senior Member
I have the Tamron 70-300 VC USD and I can tell you that it matches, if not exceeds the Nikon in regards to build and optics. Yes, I did try both. The one big difference is the VC. It acts very differently than the VR.
 

riverside

Senior Member
Ok. I will look into the conparison. IQ wise, how do they compare?

IQ is a subjective term and I didn't have both lenses to make a personal comparison. As you know what we view on the Internet regarding photographic images is a far cry from reality.

My criteria for picking the Tamron was a majority of reviews suggesting it was sharper, cost and new six year warranty versus short warranty for refurbished. I suggest reading the what seemed to me at the time endless comparison reviews and arriving at your own opinion.
 

riverside

Senior Member
I have the Tamron 70-300 VC USD and I can tell you that it matches, if not exceeds the Nikon in regards to build and optics. Yes, I did try both. The one big difference is the VC. It acts very differently than the VR.

Glad to hear it. That supports everything I've read/heard, including reports from Canon users. Haven't had mine long enough to do more than briefly play with it but so far no complaints.
 

Moab Man

Senior Member
Based on the shooting you said earlier, aviation, I would still go with a D7100 because of the doubling of the zoom capability when using it in crop mode. The D300s is a 12 megapixel file and the D7100 is 24 meg or 16 meg when shooting in crop mode. Either may you have more pixels to play with for cropping in.

Tamron lens sounds like a good way to go and make your budget.
 

Mycenius

Senior Member
I don't understand isn't the D7100 always a 24MP DX only camera, ie ... it only shoots in DX mode?

16MP mode means it only uses 2/3 of the sensor, which is smaller than DX, so the crop factor goes from x1.5 to about x2.0 IIRC, so the 300mm will become 600mm...

:)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Mycenius

Senior Member
One last thing- I found a deal for a D300s at fry's for $800... is that better?

How much is D7100? Basically you have to decide if a 3 year old design that's not got as good a feature set as I think we discussed earlier, is worth the couple of hundred dollar saving... The D300 may be more than sufficient for what you need... But the D7100 may last you a lot lot longer...?

:)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top