Used, Long Range Lenses for D5200

NostraHistoria

Senior Member
I am looking for a longer range lens for my D5200. I asked you all about the current lens I have (AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm 3.5-4.5G ED), and I received great advice. I got a nice lens. Thank you all for your help. Now, I need a lens to take pictures from far away. I would like one around 300mm. I would like it to be about $100, too. Do you know any good ones I should be looking for? Ebay links would be nice.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:

cwgrizz

Senior Member
Challenge Team
I have the newer version of the 70-300mm nikon lens. It is the AF-s with VR (look in my sig for the exact stuff on it). It works well with my D5300 which is the camera just up from what you have. You probably won't find one in your $100 price range. Add a couple hundred dollars to your price range and you may be able to find one. It is a good lens.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I am looking for a longer range lens for my D5200. I asked you all about the current lens I have (AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm 3.5-4.5G ED), and I received great advice. I got a nice lens. Thank you all for your help. Now, I need a lens to take pictures from far away. I would like one around 300mm. I would like it to be about $100, too. Do you know any good ones I should be looking for? Ebay links would be nice.
You MIGHT be able to find a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G in that price range on eBay. You'll have auto-focus but you won't have VR or any ED elements. Don't confuse it with the vastly superior, and much more expensive, Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S IF-ED VR, though. It's a good lens but that's all the praise I can give it. You just don't get really good glass at the $100 price point.
 
Last edited:

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
There is plenty of really good used glass out there at that price point. Of course if you are into measurebation you might not agree.
I guess I need to clarify I meant there are not a lot good options for 300mm glass out there at the $100 price point, generally speaking, even though that's what we're discussing. Yes, I'm sure you could dig up an exception but I think my intended point is both clear, and valid.

Oh, and I don't know what "measurebation" is.
....
 

RobV

Senior Member
I would suggest the OP spend a little more and get AF-S and VR.

Also be sure to look at 3rd party lenses.

Nostra - no, I don't have the lens I referenced.
Are you looking for a zoom, or perhaps a 300mm prime?
Note: primes are generally expensive.
 

Samo

Senior Member
@Paul Fair enough. So what would be your bottom dollar price point for a used 300mm range "really good" lens? 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.

I do like the idea of a 70-300 because that dovetails nicely with what the OP already has.

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. 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 ?

Who knows maybe it has always been that way.

Personally I feel one should purchase the best that one can afford comfortably.
 
Last edited:

Blacktop

Senior Member
@Paul Fair enough. So what would be your bottom dollar price point for a used 300mm range "really good" lens? 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.

I do like the idea of a 70-300 because that dovetails nicely with what the OP already has.

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. 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 ?

Who knows maybe it has always been that way.

Personally I feel one should purchase the best that one can afford comfortably.

In this particular case, (and having owned both the Nikon 70-300mm G and the 70-300mm AF-S VR lens ) I can tell you that the latter IS vastly superior to the former.
I think @Horoscope Fish was being too kind when he called it "just a good lens".

On a side note. Just because is someone is making an observation about an inferior product, does not mean that person is a snob. I know you didn't say it, but the way I'm reading your post, it was implied. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

Sometimes a lens is just a badly made lens, even if it's from Nikon.
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
You could look at the latest version of the Tamron 70-300,make sure it is the image stabilization one though as thats the good one.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
... 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.

...
 

Danno

Senior Member
Sometimes it is just worth the wait. I do not have a 70-300, but I have seen enough photos taken when the 70-300 with VR that I can say it is a good lens. I have not seen many taken with the non VR version.

Unless you have an unlimited budget or an extremely patient personality there is always a compromise in buying glass. Third party lenses are a good option. I have a number of them. I have also bought lenses that got decent reviews that some folks did not like and I have been pleased with them because they fit the kind of photos I take. My Tamron 70-200 28 is not the VR version and it is a bit slow to focus, but it works for me because I do not do a lot of high speed stuff, an occasional shot of my dog running is about it.

If it were me I would wait on this one. You can find them used for 350-400 on ebay. I would also look at the Tamron and read some reviews.

Just my 2 cents
 

Danno

Senior Member
Something I forgot to mention... Go to Flickr and do a photo search on the lens' you are considering and see what you think. Someone recommended that to me some time ago and I always do that now when I am considering a lens.
 
Top