Page 2 of 2

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 8:36 am
by zbot69
Quoting scopedude (Reply 48):
Quoting cpd (Reply 49):
Well, they've got the VR 70-300mm zoom lens. It's not a bad lens for most things. It's certainly not a pro-grade lens, but it's not too bad either.

Hey Winston,

This is a no brainer if money is an issue. In terms of IQ, the 70-300 VR is stellar. I owned both of the Canon 70-200 L's before (F4 and F2.8), and in terms of IQ the Nikon 70-300 easily holds its own against the Canons. There is no doubt Nikon stuck some top notch glass into the 70-300 tube. Drawbacks: AF is slow and tends to hunt in low light; after lugging around the Canon L's, you feel like using kid gloves on the 70-300's frail-seeming all-plastic body. And the manual focus ring is quite frankly preposterous, it's positioned almost like an afterthought, which it most certainly isn't when the AF starts acting up in anything but perfect light. Final MAJOR plus point: the 70-300 is seriously affordable.

Good luck finding a lens!

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:18 am
by scopedude
hi Martin,

Thanks for your feedback. I did try the 70-300VR, and compared it with Tamron's 70-300VC. At that time, I felt that the Tamron was better from 200-300mm. So I kept the Tamron - until two weeks ago I obtained the D7000 - I got funny AF issues with the Tamron. My D7000 is having difficulties locking on the subject - esp at 300mm. At this setting, the camera will not focus at all and stuck at the minimum focus setting. Naturally, I'm interested to try the 70-300 VR again. That's the only choice in Nikon camp that's affordable.

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:53 am
by zbot69
Hi Winston,

I hear ya. I read a rumor somewhere that the Tamron and the Nikon 70-300 were made in the same plant? They certainly look the part. It could be that the copy of your Nikkor 70-300 was softer @ 300. I've also read reader feedback to this effect before I purchased it. Wildly inconsistent copies floating around. On one forum read a lot of issues about the 70-300's ability to perform above 200mm, on another website found tons of users who had a similar copy as my lens that just performs fantastically (IQ). In the end I went with the Nikon because of brand name compatibility, and I did like having the extra 100mm over a 200 and most importantly... price... thing is almost a throw away, especially in Hong Kong.

Maybe go around a few shops and try to test a few copies at 300?

Again, best of luck and hope you find a great lens!

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 12:12 pm
by scopedude
Thanks Martin  

At least now I know there could be a better sample of 70-300 VR!

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 2:32 pm
by sulman
Quoting antoinepsaila (Reply 46):
Shooting at f4 handheld in an overcast day I don't think it will be a problem regarding shutterspeed. There are photographers who shoot with the bigma 50-500mm handheld and without VR and don't have any problems with sharpness

Haha, it's bloody hard with the Bigma, though!

RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 10:10 pm
by aseem
try using full frame Nikkor 75-300mm. it is discontinued but will still be available on eBay. with crop ratio you'd get 105-450mm out of it. Here is one of mine


RE: 400 Mm For Nikon

Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 12:29 am
by cpd
Quoting sulman (Reply 54):
Haha, it's bloody hard with the Bigma, though!

The Bigma's problem is that it doesn't stay F/4.0 for long, touch that zoom ring at it quickly becomes F/6.3, plus the vignetting is a big problem, along with softness at longer range. The 300mm F/4.0 prime is a nicer option if you don't mind no zooming, it is much sharper and should be cheaper too. The F/4.0 max aperture is also very useful.