anyone got a 70-300 non-VR telephoto lens??

johncook

Senior Member
Hi guys,

just wondering if anyone has a tele zoom which has a range upto 300mm but does not have VR / image stabilisation?

they tend to be cheaper, you can pick them up real cheap on Ebay.

How useful are they, what sorts of shutter speeds do you have to use to eliminate any wobble / shake at 300mm?

thanks
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
I have the 75-300 from around 1992, it was my late father's. Nice lens and I use it handheld but at 1/250 or faster and get acceptable result, sometimes great.

My wife has the 70-300 vr. It is better every time, although I think that is partly the modern optics. She can get away with lower shutter speeds.

As for the cheaper 70-300 variants, I bought one as a spare, used once, sold. Nowhere near as good as the other two.

The 70-300VR is stunning for the money. I was going to buy one recently as I was fed up with my wife continually getting better IQ. In the end I got the 70-200 VR II but that's another story.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 

eurotrash

Senior Member
I have the tamron 70-300. Hate it. I have come to the conclusion I simply need vr. I still use it, but have to be mindful that I need to really watch the shake aspect of it. Even the slightest.movement will introduce some blur at high shutter speeds. I can't wait to buy something else. Don't fall for it, buy once, buy confidence.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Thanks Geoff, yeah the 70-300 vr is quite good value, should have got that over the 18-200 in hindsight.

I think the two lenses are for different jobs. My 18-200 spends a lot of time below 100mm but has ok reach when I need it. I imagine most buy the 70-300 for what it can do above 200mm. With a 70-300 or a 70-200 you are reaching for sub 70mm quite often and it ain't there.

If I could only have one it would be the 18-200.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Top