Who has this lens?

[Lacey Anne]

The Nikon 70-300 mm f/4-5.6G VR ED AFS Lens. What do you like about it? Not like about it? I'm wanting to make this my next lens purchase, but I like to do my research before I buy anything. If you have it, tell me what you use is for and how it works for you.

 

[Lacey Anne]

Wow, my title should have said who HAS this lens.

 

[Big Mike]

Fixed

I don't have this lens...but I might be able to offer some insight.

I have heard good things about this and the Canon version. Both companies have 70-300mm lenses that are cheap and mainly for the entry level crowd. These ones (VR & IS) are said to be a fair bit better (optically).

The thing with these lenses, is that they are slow (smaller max aperture), so they don't do well in lower light situation. Especially at the long end of the zoom, because that's when you need fast shutter speeds to fight blur/camera shake.

Sure, VR (or IS) does help to reduce or eliminate blur from camera shake, so a long as you shoot subjects that aren't moving, this might be a great lens.

The problem comes if you are trying to shoot moving subjects...like people/kids, spots etc. The VR takes care of the camera movement but the slow shutter speeds will still blur the subject.

If you are in good light, then it's not really an issue.

 

[Lacey Anne]

I'm thinking of using it for more macro work. I'd like to get closer to the moon... flowers... etc.

Edit: Thanks, Mike, for fixing my title and keeping me from looking illiterate!

 

[D-50]

If your using a tripod for these types of shots the slow aperature should not be an issue.

 

[JimmyO]

Check Ken Rockwell's site. He has a good review for it.

 

[Lacey Anne]

If your using a tripod for these types of shots the slow aperature should not be an issue.

Oh of course! I would defiantely be using a tripod.

 

[Lacey Anne]

Check Ken Rockwell's site. He has a good review for it.

I'll do that, thanks!

 

[Big Mike]

If you are using a tripod, then you wouldn't need the VR. (although it would be nice to have for when not using a tripod).

What is the minimum focus distance of that lens? If macro is what you are looking at doing, you may want an actual macro lens.

 

[Lyncca]

Fixed

I don't have this lens...but I might be able to offer some insight.

I have heard good things about this and the Canon version. Both companies have 70-300mm lenses that are cheap and mainly for the entry level crowd. These ones (VR & IS) are said to be a fair bit better (optically).

The thing with these lenses, is that they are slow (smaller max aperture), so they don't do well in lower light situation. Especially at the long end of the zoom, because that's when you need fast shutter speeds to fight blur/camera shake.

Sure, VR (or IS) does help to reduce or eliminate blur from camera shake, so a long as you shoot subjects that aren't moving, this might be a great lens.

The problem comes if you are trying to shoot moving subjects...like people/kids, spots etc. The VR takes care of the camera movement but the slow shutter speeds will still blur the subject.

If you are in good light, then it's not really an issue.

I have this lens and agree with all of the above. I've gotten some great zoo shots with it when the animals were laying around in the sun, but if they were moving quick or in the shade, it was fuzzy at the long end (which I use a lot at our zoo). I have some pics on my site. All of the zoo pics use this lens.

http://www.lyncca.smugmug.com/gallery/4447971_9QNts

For my boxer hauling a$$ at the dog park, he definately has to be in full sun in order to get the speeds I need. I have still yet to get a really good one since my panning skills are still a bit lacking too.

As far as macro, I tried to use this for water drop shots and it can't get close enough (4.9 ft min focus distance). If you are within a few feet, it won't focus.

Now, don't get me wrong. This lens has its purpose, but I'm not sure if it will fit for your needs if you want macro. Oh, and it doesn't have a macro setting like the Sigma version.

 

[Trenton Romulox]

I'll do that, thanks!

Eh, Ken Rockwell isn't the best...

Try Bjorn Rorslett, I believe his site is naturofotograf.com. He is a better lens reviewer than Rockwell in my experiences.

 

[Socrates]

Oh of course! I would defiantely be using a tripod.

This lens does not automatically detect the presence of a tripod. Be sure to mechanically turn the VR off yourself.

 

[uplander]

I have th canon version (70-300 IS USM, not to be confused with the 75-300 versions) The glass is pretty sharp if you have enough light and on a tripod should do you well. Hand held in low light is where this lens suffers but it has the ability to take sharp pics under the right conditions. I thought of getting rid of mine but I find it handy for when a large lens just isn't practical.