Nikon 70-300 VR

[TBaraki]

Has anybody got their hands on one of these yet?

I am quite interested in this piece. I hope it is superior optically to the ED and the G lenses of the same range. The VR can be a very useful tool to have also.

Thanks.

 

[DepthAfield]

Looks like a nice lens! Gotta love that VR technology… Shaky hands be damned!

While the 300mm of focal length that piece of glass offers is nice, I would still recommend the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR instead.

 

[TBaraki]

...I would still recommend the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR instead.

Ideally yes. It looks like a stellar piece of glass. However, for the price of the 70-200VR I could get the 12-24 and the 70-300VR.

I'll probably have to evaluate what range I would use most often and invest accordingly. I don't NEED a greater range. The 18-70mm has done alright. A telephoto is high on the "would be nice/useful to have" list though. The price of the 70-300VR is something I'd be willing to pay for a non-necessity lens. I'm also debating wether to go longer or wider with my next purchase.

Another option would be a used 180mm f/2.8 prime. They seem to come up on ebay relatively often and have gotten good reviews around the web.

Thanks for your input, DepthAfield.

 

[Big Mike]

A friend of mine has the Canon Equivalent (70-300 4-5.6 IS USM) and he seems to like it. From what I have read...none of the 70-300 lenses are as good as the 70-200 lenses (optically speaking)...but the 70-300 lenses are affordable.

 

[newrmdmike]

i would drop the money for the by 200, f/4 is pretty slow for me.

 

[fmw]

Ideally yes. It looks like a stellar piece of glass. However, for the price of the 70-200VR I could get the 12-24 and the 70-300VR.

I can vouch for the 12-24 f4. That is a very good lens. I'm particularly impressed by how little distortion it displays at the short end of the zoom range. It is the equivalent of the 18mm f2.8 prime I had in the 35mm days but a stop slower. It has no more distortion than the old 18. If you go back 20 years and look at the 20mm Nikkors of that era, the corners looked like someone was stretching them terribly. The 15's were always that way. Computer aided design and new technologies like asymmetrical elements has really improved wide angles. This lens is a dandy. I recommend it for sure.

Another option is to consider one of the "other brands" such as Tamron or Sigma. I've always found them to be good optically. Certainly they would be as good or better than the 70-300 zoom.

 

[TBaraki]

Is the 80-200 2.8D another quality option? The price is much less painful than the 70-200VR. I am willing to dish out for quality equiptment, but I do not need pro gear.

Weight is no concern for me. AF speed is secondary. I'm primarily interested in the optical quality.

Who thought spending money would be so difficult?

 

[dsp921]

Is the 80-200 2.8D another quality option? The price is much less painful than the 70-200VR. I am willing to dish out for quality equiptment, but I do not need pro gear.

Weight is no concern for me. AF speed is secondary. I'm primarily interested in the optical quality.

Who thought spending money would be so difficult?

Yeah, the 80-200 is a good option if you don't want to shell out for the 70-200. It's very good optically.