... Fair enough. So what would be your bottom dollar price point for a used 300mm range "really good" lens?
I'm not sure I have a "bottom dollar price point" for what I would consider a very good, used lens in the 300mm range. Any particular lens, used or new, simply costs what it costs and it would be up to me to determine if what I'm
getting is worth what I'm
paying.
...
Is your suggestion the 70-300 plain old G that is vastly inferior to the one with ed and vr? It is only "good"? Seems rather subjective that statement.
It's too early to look up all the alphabet soup for all three versions but yes; I mean to say the current version of the Nikon 70-300mm, the VR version let's call it, is superior to its predecessors; those being the non-VR, G & ED versions. By "superior" I mean it renders better image quality as measured by such things as sharpness, contrast and color, all other things being equal. In my opinion, calling the earliest version of the lens "good" is being a bit too kind. Calling the second edition "good" I think is accurate and the latest version I would call very, very good if not excellent. I certainly think it's punching well above its weight-class.
And yes, terms like "good" and "superior" are subjective; I think that's a given. Do you know of a purely objective scale on which lenses are judged we could be using instead? Because if you do I'd interested to hear about it.
...
I do like the idea of a 70-300 because that dovetails nicely with what the OP already has.
I agree. It seems like a fine choice.
...
Measurebation is the attitude of mine is bigger than yours, phrases like vastly superior for example, that are so very ubiquitous in the photography world today.
I am of the opinion some lenses are better than others, that some lenses are
significantly better than others and in some instances would be perfectly comfortable using the phrase, "vastly superior". If you want to call that "measurebation", I guess that's up to you.
Let me ask you, though: Are you of the opinion that all lenses are created equal?
...
Can a lowly cheap lens not produce a great picture? Or likewise a 5000 series body cannot possibly make a picture as good as a D750?
I really don't remember saying anything like that... Not even remotely. In the final analysis of my photography, or anyone else's, I'm of the opinion the images speak for themselves. I could care less if you got there using a rig that cost five dollars, or five-thousand dollars.
...
Personally I feel one should purchase the best that one can afford comfortably.
And how would you define "best"? Sounds a little subjective to me...
Not that I disagree.
...