advice on decent zoom lens

Hi All!

Well i got myself a D5100 earlier this year bundled with a 18-55mm..
Now am really itching for a decent zoom lens..

I really have my eyes set on the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens... but a few people's comments on the net about the AF being too slow is holding me back...

I also checked out the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED (4.3x) Lens but don't see too much of a difference considering the price diff, am i wrong?

As i said, i just started off, never had a camera before, but since i have had the D5100 i don't seem to find much time for anything else

I don't think i would be out photographing action sports and stuff, but definitely nature & wildlife and of course the sky
i know i won't get anywhere close with either of these lenses, but i guess that's about how much i can afford for the moment.

Please advice if this lens (55-300) is recommended & what would i be missing out on in comparison.
If also you have any other lenses in mind, please do let me know!

Thanks a bunch

Re: Need some advice!

I own the 55-300 VR lens and I love it! Plenty fast AF. Don't listen to the ones that say it isn't fast enough. Usually those are the ones that have "fast" lenses...in the 1.8 - 2.8 category, and are used to the speed of those lenses. Believe me, for what you want to use it for, and your present budget, you will love this lens. Go get 'er!

Re: Need some advice!

I haven't used either and they both are VR & AFS...Stable and pretty fast...If you are going to do indoor/night sports or low light club photography you would need a faster lens...What are the cost of these...

Re: Need some advice!

letmedanz said:

Hi All!

Well i got myself a D5100 earlier this year bundled with a 18-55mm..
Now am really itching for a decent zoom lens..

I really have my eyes set on the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Lens... but a few people's comments on the net about the AF being too slow is holding me back...

I also checked out the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED (4.3x) Lens but don't see too much of a difference considering the price diff, am i wrong?

As i said, i just started off, never had a camera before, but since i have had the D5100 i don't seem to find much time for anything else

I don't think i would be out photographing action sports and stuff, but definitely nature & wildlife and of course the sky
i know i won't get anywhere close with either of these lenses, but i guess that's about how much i can afford for the moment.

Please advice if this lens (55-300) is recommended & what would i be missing out on in comparison.
If also you have any other lenses in mind, please do let me know!

Thanks a bunch

Click to expand...

First of all - there is. Difference between a "fast lens" and fast "auto focus" a fast lens is generally a large aperture such as 1.4 1.8 2.8 etc. A fast auto focusing lens is one that finds focus quickly. Both the 55-300mm and 70-300mm have the silent wave motor which are very fast in focusing. I personally like the 70-300VR it's older and built much better has a metal lens mount instead of a plastic one. It's not great on dark days, however give it some sunshine and it's hard to beat.

Re: Need some advice!

You're absolutely right, Sam. I should have made myself a little more clear. The faster lenses usually have a faster focusing motor built into them. Not always......but the ones I've used seemed to me to be a lot faster focusing than the 55-300 or even the 70-300. Like I said, though, the 55-300 and the 70-300 have fast enough focus to get the job done.

Re: Need some advice!

salvatore said:

First of all - there is. Difference between a "fast lens" and fast "auto focus" a fast lens is generally a large aperture such as 1.4 1.8 2.8 etc. A fast auto focusing lens is one that finds focus quickly. Both the 55-300mm and 70-300mm have the silent wave motor which are very fast in focusing. I personally like the 70-300VR it's older and built much better has a metal lens mount instead of a plastic one. It's not great on dark days, however give it some sunshine and it's hard to beat.

Click to expand...

My 55-300 has a metal mount, not plastic. And yeah, in the sun, they're both hard to beat.

Re: Need some advice!

pedroj said:

I haven't used either and they both are VR & AFS...Stable and pretty fast...If you are going to do indoor/night sports or low light club photography you would need a faster lens...What are the cost of these...

Click to expand...

The 55-300 costs about $370 & the 70-300 costs about $560...
A difference of about $200 between the two...

Re: Need some advice!

I guess this would be the best for the price...
I have not done any research on Tamron/Sigma lenses though...
But i have heard that nothing can beat the Nikkorr lenses...

so would it be wise not to look at these for the moment since this is technically my first lens?

Re: Need some advice!

I'm in the same boat as you and can't decide. I'm looking at the Nikon 55-300 and the Tamron 70-300. The Tamron gets really good reviews, especially regarding the image stabilization.

Re: Need some advice!

Tobrew said:

I'm in the same boat as you and can't decide. I'm looking at the Nikon 55-300 and the Tamron 70-300. The Tamron gets really good reviews, especially regarding the image stabilization.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the club
Anyhow, the Tamron has a slightly larger aperture of 4 but that's usable only at 70mm..

Re: Need some advice!

salvatore said:

First of all - there is. Difference between a "fast lens" and fast "auto focus" a fast lens is generally a large aperture such as 1.4 1.8 2.8 etc. A fast auto focusing lens is one that finds focus quickly. Both the 55-300mm and 70-300mm have the silent wave motor which are very fast in focusing. I personally like the 70-300VR it's older and built much better has a metal lens mount instead of a plastic one. It's not great on dark days, however give it some sunshine and it's hard to beat.

Click to expand...

^^ Ditto. Same here. I like a metal mounted lens because I broke a kit lens with plastic mounting and I decided to not ever invest in plastic mounted lenses.

Re: Need some advice!

I have the nikon 70-300 vr, great lens. If you ever decide to go Fx, you're set since it's actually a Fx lens

Re: Need some advice!

cnyram said:

I have the nikon 70-300 vr, great lens. If you ever decide to go Fx, you're set since it's actually a Fx lens

Click to expand...

Pardon me, still a complete beginner..
how is the 70-300 different than the 55-300?
Both are 4.5 - 5.6 with VRII, metal mounts..
so apart from the Fx compatibility (and i see it a 20mm loss at the lower end)?

Re: Need some advice!

letmedanz said:

Pardon me, still a complete beginner..
how is the 70-300 different than the 55-300?
Both are 4.5 - 5.6 with VRII, metal mounts..
so apart from the Fx compatibility (and i see it a 20mm loss at the lower end)?

Click to expand...

The 70-300vr is a slightly heavier build. Some consider it to have better IQ due partly to the fact that you are using more of the center of the lens with a dx camera body. Generally zooms with a shorter focal range tend to have greater IQ also. These are opinions I have read. Most folks are very happy with the 55-300 also. I have found it beneficial to search for reviews where reviewers have owned both lenses in question.

Re: Need some advice!

I have the 70-300 and I must say it is a fantastic lens. However, under low light or when you subject is in a shaded area, like the bird hiden among the tree brenches, focus is a problem.

Being f4.5-5.6, it is not practical to add TC, although it is something I keep thinking of doing. If budget permits, go for the 70-200 f2.8 then add TC later. Sigma or Tamron will be cheaper.

Re: Need some advice!

Bukitimah said:

I have the 70-300 and I must say it is a fantastic lens. However, under low light or when you subject is in a shaded area, like the bird hiden among the tree brenches, focus is a problem.

Being f4.5-5.6, it is not practical to add TC, although it is something I keep thinking of doing. If budget permits, go for the 70-200 f2.8 then add TC later. Sigma or Tamron will be cheaper.

Click to expand...

Thanks! Am guessing the 70-200 f2.8 would be well over my budget for now, though i would have loved to get that

Regarding Sigma/Tamron, i've read in a number of places that though the lenses are really great, they usually do not match up to Nikon's quality? Is that true or just a stereo type?

I was thinking of getting a nikkor lens cos this is going to be my very first lens

Re: Need some advice!

(I was thinking of getting a Nikkor lens cos this is going to be my very first lens )

Well if you have the budget for it, then I'd certainly go for it. However, budget being an issue, I wouldn't pass up any of those two other brands.......Sigma being the one I'd really prefer. Another one you didn't mention is the Tokina brand. Excellent lenses, comparable to the Nikkors.

Re: Need some advice!

fotojack said:

(I was thinking of getting a Nikkor lens cos this is going to be my very first lens )

Well if you have the budget for it, then I'd certainly go for it. However, budget being an issue, I wouldn't pass up any of those two other brands.......Sigma being the one I'd really prefer. Another one you didn't mention is the Tokina brand. Excellent lenses, comparable to the Nikkors.

Click to expand...

I second this and will add that the best lens for your camera is a lens you own and use. Even if it's better, if you can't afford, than it's not better than the one you own.

Now that just adds a LOT to the confusion of picking a lens

letmedanz said:

Now that just adds a LOT to the confusion of picking a lens

Click to expand...

Who said this is so simple. If you just want the best, read the reviews and get it. But best lenses have their prices. There are some questions that only you can answer. What do you need the lens for? Is this for a "Pro" use, or just for weekend snaps? How much money can you spend without going hungry or homeless? We can't answer this for you.

One thing I can say though is that I got great bargains by getting a used lens. Wether you buy from a reputable shop or ebay, there will be a huge saving done with a second hand lens. when I first got my D700, I needed a walkaround lens. I thought the 24-70 was way too expensive and the 24-120 on the heavy side. Well, I shopped ebay and got a Tamron 28-200 for 125$. It's not as good as the 24-70, 24-120 or 70-200 Nikkors 2.8, but it served me well at the time. And sometimes, I still will put it on even if I now have the others because it's still my lightest lens to cover FX.

So, take your time, read, take pictures with what you have and then see what you can get.

I forgot that a macro lens is a lens that I would never part with. (just to give you more food for thought)