Lens Help (quick response if possible)

[natural.disaster]

Is this lens good for sports and distance?
[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-300mm-4-5-6G-Nikkor-Worldwide/dp/B00008B0Z6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1283978647&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF Zoom Nikkor Lens (Worldwide), in Black: Electronics[/ame]

I will be shooting several football games. Right now im using the 55-200 lens...was looking for something that will do a little better far away and still get great clear pics. Will this one be any better than what i have?
If this lens isnt right for what im wanting, which do you suggest?

Thanks so much.

 

[natural.disaster]

One more question...Are the teleconverters worth the money? When are they used?

 

[AdrianC]

This lens will give you a bit more reach, but its only a bit faster then the 55-200.

Edit:
Teleconverters are ok, however you lose a couple of stops of light when using them. I don't think the 55-200 is compatible with teleconverters tho.

 

[tirediron]

That's an adequate lens for distance. For outdoor sports it might do on bright sunny days, for indoor? Unlikely given a maximum aperture of f4. As well, it's a relatively low-end consumer lens and not built to stand the rigors of heavy use. Consider looking for a used 80-200 f2.8; running between $700 - 850 it's a lot more money, but it's also a LOT more lens.

Teleconverters are used to increase the focal length of the lens, however with every gain, there is a loss; if you added a 2x TC to this lens, it would become a 140 - 600mm BUT the maximum aperture would increase to an f8 - f11. At apertures smaller than f8, autofocus may not work.

If you do buy a TC, bear in mind that you will need a third-party brand as Nikon TCs will not work with this lens whereas they will work with the 80-200.

 

[gsgary]

It will be ok nothing spectacular and if you fit a teleconverter to it it will be so slow and unless you have a pro body it wont AF

 

[natural.disaster]

Gotcha...
I wont be spending over $300 on a lens any time soon....
I didnt much like the thought of a converter anyway.
Ill be making about $600 off the photos...so im not sure if it would be worth it to go ahead and get the lens, or just stick with the 55-200 for now. So far its done pretty well...I just wanted to see if i could get some more distance.

 

[KmH]

The lens you linked to is one of the worst lenses Nikon has made for the consumer market in recent times.

Focus is soft, and it has significant chromatic aberation throughout the zoom range.

That lens was so bad Nikon replaced it with this lens: Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED 2161 - B&H which is one of the best lens values Nikon currently has.