Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

70-300mm which one

lens nikon 70-300 vr

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

I want to buy a 70-300mm but which one

70-300mm AF-P DX a non VR version or the 70-300mm AF-S

Which one is better, and does VR on that long lens matter. 

Please help



#2
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

VR is definitely a boon on these. The old AF-S has much better contrast at the long end and is completely free from vignetting on DX as it has a larger image circle. Whether it is worth the price premium is another matter... Another advantage of the AF-S is that it has switches instead of being controlled by software. This makes it much faster to work with when you need to change VR modes during shooting.



#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

I read your other post now... The D7000 don't support the AF-P lenses, so the choice will be between the AF-S 70-300 and the 55-300. In that case, the 70-300 is far superior. The difference is larger than between the 70-300 versions.



#4
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

I did not know that. Yeah, but i was also thinking about maybe 18-200mm or 55-200, what do you think of them, 70-300 af-s is a bit more expensive.



#5
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 55-200 is a good and cheap tele zoom. I, personally, don’t like the superzooms. There are many compromises involved in building a zoom with a big range, especially if it has to go from wie to tele and I would rather have the inconvenience of changing lenses.

#6
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

what would you recommend for me, i have a 50mm, up to 150$, 18-200 or something else?



#7
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

As you have no zoom lenses and a limited budget, why not go for the kit duo? 18-55 and 55-200 give better results than the 18-200 and are often sold off as people see them as junk lenses, which they definitely aren't. I don't know what prices are like where you live, but sometimes a Tamron 17-50/2.8 and a Tamron 70-300 can be found near the $150 mark together.



#8
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

I was thinking a 18-200 cause that a bit wider angel, but i just found a 55-200mm VRII for 150$. Which one to choose?



#9
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Get the 55-200, but try to talk it down a bit... Finding an 18-55 VR or an old 18-70 cheap shouldn't be too difficult. The 55-200 is a *very* good lens, even for full price new.



#10
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

Yeah i will try. I just want to be fast and sharp lens, so it is better than 18-200mm. 

And how it is perform on landscape photography, i know that is not that wide but still, will photos be sharp?



#11
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

It is sharp enough and has low enough distortion so you can stitch shots together in post to form a wider view.



#12
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

Still dont know which one to pick...



#13
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,228 posts
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

As Peter recommended, the 18-55 and 55-200 combination will be much better than the 18-200.  If it were me I would go with the two lenses, even if I had to buy one now and one later.  



#14
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

I have a chance to buy a 18-55mm VR II a new version, so how it performs, is it sharp and fast, is gonna perform good on my D7000. And is it to much to pay for it, it is 125$? 



#15
vladimir777

vladimir777

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Country Flag

And also a 55-200 VR II, so which one now?



#16
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,210 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

As you have a 50, in what direction don't you think that works? Do you want a wider or narrower field of view as your first zoom? If the answer is that you often have to take a step(or several) back and still don't get what you want in the frame, start with the 18-55. If you find that you very often need to crop to just show your subject, start with the 55-200. Only you can answer these questions as we all see differently.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: lens, nikon, 70-300, vr