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

Lens recommendation


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1
snell

snell

    Active Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 63 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationSouthern New Jersey

I know that opinions can vary but I really need some help. When I got my D5600 it had two kit lenes, the AF-P Nikor 18-55 3.5-5.G with VR & the AF-P Nikor 70-300 4.5-6.3 G ED without VR. I have had very pleasant experiences with the 18-55.

The 70-300 has been a disaster from day one. Perhaps its the lack of VR and my technique but the results have always been soft or blurry shots across the zoom range.

I just sent it back to Nikon for service and upon it's return I was advised it was within factory specs. 

I'm not prepared to frustrate myself anymore trying to use something that I cant get to work. Hence the request for opinions...

 

I want to get a zoom in the 300 range or perhaps even 200 to replace it. A friend in the photography business is singing the praises of a recent Tamron release but its somewhere in the neighborhood of $800-$900. After my experiences with the $150 range Nikor (that is apparently within factory spec,) I don't want to go dirt cheap but $800-$900 is way out of my range. Any suggestions on a mid range (say $300-$500) zoom that performs well? The operant issue here is performs well. This Nikor has me a bit gun shy and I really want a glass with a good reputation for sharpness. 

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this long post but my frustration level is kinda high  :(



#2
ScottinPollock

ScottinPollock

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationWest Slope Northern Sierra Nevada
Your issues with the 70-300 are most likely due to it not being a stabilized lens. Without the stabilized ability, your shutter speed would need to be 1.5 x focal length (meaning 1/450th for 300mm) at best for hand held shots.

Use a tripod, or get a stabilized (VR) copy of the lens.

#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,844 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

It might be worth looking for a used AF-S 70-300 VR. It is surprisingly sharp.

I used it on a D7200 in my One Camera... minichallenge.

One week, one camera, one lens week ending May 20 2018 - Mini-Challenges, Member Contests, and Games - NikonForums.com

One week, one camera, one lens week ending May 27 2018 - Mini-Challenges, Member Contests, and Games - NikonForums.com

 

If you follow the link under each photo, you will find the EXIF for each one.

 

The sailplane shots from Saturday were made with the same combo.

Swedish Armed Forces Air Show 2018 - Cars and Machinery - NikonForums.com

 

If you have to shoot handheld, especially without VR, don't be afraid to raise your ISO to get a usable shutter speed. Noise and a lower dynamic range are not good, but blurry shots are much worse.



#4
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,069 posts
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

My suggestion:  Take your existing 70-300 out on a bright, sunny day and take some hand held images with a variety of shutter speeds.  Also take some from tripod if you have one available.  That SHOULD give you some good images and give you an idea of how fast you need to be to hand hold and get a sharp image.  Once you get to 1/1000 or faster (or use a tripod / monopod), VR isn't going to do you much good.  On the other hand, I believe Peter indicated above that the VR version of the lens is very nice.  

 

The 70-200 f2.8 lenses are all very nice from what I have seen, but they are bigger and heavier than the 70-300.  As you've noted, they are not inexpensive but those that I have used have been very sharp if I do my job.  

 

BTW - I rarely if ever turn on VR as I'm usually shooting very fast shutter speeds and / or I am using some form of support (usually a monopod).



#5
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,844 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

  On the other hand, I believe Peter indicated above that the VR version of the lens is very nice.  

 

Tom, I was talking about the AF-S version that was made between 2006 and 2017. The FX 70-300 is about equal to the AF-S version, except that I don't like how it renders the transition from sharp to unsharp compared to the older one. The DX version is a bit less contrasty than its bigger cousins, but I think it is slightly sharper than the non-VR version. This can be because of sample variation as I have only handled one of each of the current versions, though.



#6
Malice

Malice

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

For what it's worth, I've had some good results with the Tamron 70-300 F/4-5.6 Di VC USD on my D3100, even though the keeper rate's not really tremendous.



#7
Fletch

Fletch

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationHawaii

I like my Tamron 16-300mm lens, I bought it with the knowledge that as a super(?) zoom it would be a little soft at the 16 and 300 ends of the range.  I find in actual use its better at 16 that I expected and a little worse at 300.  I am able to correct these flaws in editing and so I am happy with this lens as a all in one travel lens.



#8
Aqqib Maula

Aqqib Maula

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Country Flag

wait a min. Isnt the AF-P 70-300mm 4.5-6.3g DX ED has VR? but just has no switch? it has to be turned on internally through the menus.



#9
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,844 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

wait a min. Isnt the AF-P 70-300mm 4.5-6.3g DX ED has VR? but just has no switch? it has to be turned on internally through the menus.

There are two versions of the DX lens. Just like the 18-55 there is a cheaper version without VR.



#10
fallout666

fallout666

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 410 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Locationcfl area of space coast
You have dx 70-300mm vr and 70-300mm full frame one. Just like mecro_61 said you see some changes but if have full frame one you got to add in extra lenght to mm since full frame. I know at 200mm your 300mm not sure what 300mm is at.

#11
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,844 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

You have dx 70-300mm vr and 70-300mm full frame one. Just like mecro_61 said you see some changes but if have full frame one you got to add in extra lenght to mm since full frame. I know at 200mm your 300mm not sure what 300mm is at.

The difference between a DX and an FX lens is that the DX lens projects a smaller image circle to keep cost and mass down. The focal length is the same. A 200 mm lens will give the same 8°10' diagonal picture angle on DX, it doesn't matter whether it is designated DX or FX. The focal length is a physical property of the lens and doesn't change depending on how the image is cropped.



#12
Gizmo84

Gizmo84

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Country Flag

I know that opinions can vary but I really need some help. When I got my D5600 it had two kit lenes, the AF-P Nikor 18-55 3.5-5.G with VR & the AF-P Nikor 70-300 4.5-6.3 G ED without VR. I have had very pleasant experiences with the 18-55.

The 70-300 has been a disaster from day one. Perhaps its the lack of VR and my technique but the results have always been soft or blurry shots across the zoom range.

I just sent it back to Nikon for service and upon it's return I was advised it was within factory specs. 

I'm not prepared to frustrate myself anymore trying to use something that I cant get to work. Hence the request for opinions...

 

I want to get a zoom in the 300 range or perhaps even 200 to replace it. A friend in the photography business is singing the praises of a recent Tamron release but its somewhere in the neighborhood of $800-$900. After my experiences with the $150 range Nikor (that is apparently within factory spec,) I don't want to go dirt cheap but $800-$900 is way out of my range. Any suggestions on a mid range (say $300-$500) zoom that performs well? The operant issue here is performs well. This Nikor has me a bit gun shy and I really want a glass with a good reputation for sharpness. 

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this long post but my frustration level is kinda high  :(

 

Unfortunately, the AF-P 70-300mm lens is almost useless at the far end without VR unless using a tripod.  I don't know why Nikon even sells the non VR model of this lens, and then packages it as a kit lens with the newest DX models.  The VR model is only $50 more.  I don't think you are better off with the Tamron lens.  The AF-P 70-300mm VR really is all that it's cracked up to be and lives up to the hype.  It's very sharp even wide open at all focal lengths, and I bought this lens for only $139 on eBay.

 

I shot this picture at the zoo at 300mm wide open at f6.3, while riding a ski lift type ride while bobbing around and in an awkward position and couldn't keep the camera still.  The VR works wonders.

 

i-WFs5jQ2-XL.jpg

 

Another shot wide open at 300mm.  The image is even cropped.

 

i-PP956cz-XL.jpg

 

Another shot riding overhead in a swinging chair wide open again at 300mm

 

i-WwcPQTs-XL.jpg

 

at 220mm at f5.6

 

i-hZTkpNv-XL.jpg

 

This is an outstanding daylight lens while at the same time being dirt cheap.  I did my research  before getting this lens, so I made sure that I got the VR version.



#13
Groundhog34

Groundhog34

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationAlabama

I had both the VR and non VR  in the 70-300 AF-S similar to the P just a different motor. The VR model captures much better than the non VR especially hand held near the 300 end.



#14
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 353 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Site Supporter

I’ve got the AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6 E ED VR, the FX version. They’re about £500 in the U.K. these days, having started off at £800. I use it on my D610.

It is a remarkably sharp lens, particularly for what it is - a low/mid priced zoom. It amazed me, I wasn’t expecting it to be anywhere near as good, it is way sharper than my AF-S 50/1.4. Okay, it’s not the fastest but it’s VR does make up for that to a degree - ie for stationary subjects.

I have no idea of the experience level of the original poster and I have no wish to appear to talk down to anyone but for any relatively inexperienced people reading - a VR lens is only going to help you with stationary subjects. If your subjects are moving, you need high shutter speeds and they only come with lots of light, wide apertures or higher ISO settings.