70-300 Telephoto for Nikon D90

<p>I'd like to get a nice Telephoto lens for my D90.</p>

<p>I had a photographer friend mention that Tamron makes nice Telephoto lenses so I priced a Tamron and a Nikon. Only about $100 difference in price, but the Tamron goes to f/4 and the Nikon only goes to f/4.5.<br>

Here's the link for the TAMRON I am considering: <br>

 

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-300mm-4-0-5-6-Digital-Cameras/dp/B003YH9DZE/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1291044352&sr=8-6">http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-300mm-4-0-5-6-Digital-Cameras/dp/B003YH9DZE/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1291044352&sr=8-6</a></p>

 

<br>

And a link for the NIKON:

<p>

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000HJPK2C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1291044766&sr=8-2">http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000HJPK2C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1291044766&sr=8-2</a></p>

<p>Does anyone have any opinions on / experience with either of these lenses? </p>

<p>Thanks in advance!</p>

<p> </p>

</p>

<br>

 

<p> </p>

</p>

 

<p>I've used the Nikon and it's quite good. I haven't used the Tamron, but I'd like to - everybody who's written about it seems pleased.</p>

<p>I have only played around with the Nikon 70-300mm VR, but the Tamron Di VC is excellent optically. I am less impressed with its construction quality, though. I have a lot more details in photo.net's review of the Tamron lens: <a href="../equipment/tamron/70-300di-vc/">http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/70-300di-vc/</a></p>

<p>Thanks! I'll be sure to read the review!</p>

<p>There is a new Nikon 55-300 VR that is less expensive than the 70-300 VR or Tamron 70-300 VC. I haven't seen any tests, but it should be worth considering. It is smaller and lighter than the other two if that is important.</p>

<p>I had the Nikon 70-300 vr and wasn't overly impressed with the Image Quality - but I tended to shoot a lot of low light stuff - so it really wasn't in the wheelhouse for that lens.</p>

<p>The other thing that I found is that the 70 mm just wasn't wide enough for a lot of the other stuff that I shoot.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>At $400 (on sale for $360) I wouldn't take the 55-300 over either of the 70-300 options.</p>

<p>I have played around with the Nikon 55-300mm AF-S VR DX. It has a more consumer-grade construction quality and that is why it is lighter than the Nikon 70-300mm/f4.5-5.6 AF-s VR. The front element on the 55-300 rotates when you focus. I didn't get to check its optical quality, though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"I have a lot more details in photo.net's review of the Tamron lens..."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Shun - there is a bad hyperlink at the bottom of your article.<br>

"http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=982385" points to "http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/photodb/folder?folder_id=982385" which returns a 404 error.</p>

<p>Michael, thanks for pointing that out. The link I provdied is correct: <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=982385">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=982385</a><br>

The problem is that photo.net's software automatically translates it to point to equipment/tamron and of course my folder does not exist under there. Unfortunately, I need to ask our IT people to fix it. There isn't much I can do about that link myself.</p>

<p>The Nikon is superb. It shoots wonderful photos and handles great. There is functionally no difference between f4 and f4.5 at the wide end, really. The 55-300 does not allow for instant over-ride, which in a tele is especially problematic in my experience. Also, having the barrel rotate makes a polarizer worse than useless on a lens. I'd never consider a lens with this flaw.</p>

<p>I like the Nikon 55-200mm VR zoom I bought for $150 as a refurb very much. I am sure I'd enjoy the 55-300mm more for the extra reach. I have the Nikon 70-300mm ED zoom as well, but prefer the 55-200mm as 55mm is a more useful focal length when I don't need a powerful telephoto. Plus it's lighter weight and more compact which is nice for travel. I've never needed anything like "instant over-ride" - I assume you are talking about focus? I don't map my AF to the AF-ON button to use that feature, I leave it with the shutter release.</p>

<p>I had fogotten about the lack of manual AF override on the 55-300 DX. Unfortunately, that is a "feature" on all lower consumer-grade Nikon AF-S lenses. See this recent thread by Alex C., as he/she found out that in real-life photography, having manual overrise is important: <a href="00XZZn">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00XZZn</a></p>

<p>Nikon 70-300 is great for the money IMHO. Do not use it in low light, but VR works well and it is pretty sharp</p>

<p>Shot at ISO 400, f5.6, 300mm, 1/2000, admittely in bright sun light</p>

<p><img src="http://www.photopilio.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/BBestof_SLWS-28.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="531" /></p>

<p>Extremely sharp lens in the middle of its range, great for medium to bright light. Would buy it again in a heartbeat.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>the 70-300 VR is well-regarded and a staple of many photographer's bags. but the tamron is faster (slightly) at the wide end and has better IQ than its nikon counterpart. it's also $400 with mail-in rebate, which is a bit of a win -win, since the nikon costs more (unless you get a deal with instant savings). i would avoid a 55-200 or 55-300 if you ever want to move up to full frame.</p>

<p>I'll be bold enough to say I like the Tamron better. It isn't built like 80-200. But neither is the VR. It matches the VR in focus speed and acquisition. VC is at least as good as VR in this case although maybe a little less smooth. Images are sharp throughout the focal range.<br>

I think it'd be hard to find a better choice for the money, size, and performance than either lens.</p>

<p>The Nikon is reasonably sharp in good light. Excellent value!</p><div></div>

Found an auto focus VR 1.4-5.6 Nikon 55-200 lens for $179 and a Tamron 70-300 auto focus lens for $119

at a pawn shop. Are they good deals and will the Tamron fit the new D7000?

Haven't bought the new D7000 yet but its on my list.

<p>Yes and yes (assuming the Tamron is in Nikon mount), but the Tamron is probably the old non-VC version which isn't as good, optically, as the Nikon VR model or the newer Tamron.</p>

<p>I bought the Nikkor AF-S 70-300mm 4.5 ED VR before traveling to Yellowstone in 2009. I really wanted to have a chance of getting images of wildlife that I was seeing in previous trips.<br>

It was everything I wanted in a midrange zoom and I don't regret the purchase.</p>