Telesor 300mm for Nikon. How good (or how bad)?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by hique, Oct 24, 2005.

  1. Hi there.

    I found a very cheap 300mm lens for Nikon in good shape.

    The lens is a Telesor Auto 300mm F:4 for F-mount.

    Does anybody know this lens? How good is it? I am looking for a
    replacement for my 70-300 that I think it's a little crappy at 300mm.
    Do you think that this Telesor prime would have a better performance
    than this Nikon zoom?

    I know that the ideal choice would be the AFS 300mm F:4 but right now
    I don't plan to invest in such a lens.

    If someone knows something about Telesor lenses and this prime in
    particular I would be happy to hear.
  2. I'd suggest sticking with the 70-300 Nikkor, depending on which model you have. I was unimpressed by the low end "G" version but the somewhat more expensive version with a conventional aperture ring and ED element was significantly better. Some folks prefer the older 75-300 Nikkor, which feels more sturdily made than the 70-300 models, altho' I don't know how the older lens performs optically.

    Or you could dig around the KEH or other website for a lens from a third party maker known for good to excellent quality lenses: Tokina, Tamron and Sigma are the big three among current makers of AF lenses. If you're willing to consider a manual focus lens Vivitar Series 1 and Kirons were very good. (Kiron was formed by the same company that originally manufactured some Series 1 lenses.) I've owned four or five Series 1 and Kiron manual focus zooms in Canon FD, Nikon F and Olympus OM mounts that were all very good.

    If I'm recalling correctly Telesor is one of those undistinguished marketers of relabeled items made by various manufacturers, similar to Vivitar and Soligor.

    There have been dozens of these photographic equipment marketing companies over the decades. It's impossible to comment on the quality of a particular item without trying it for yourself. For example, I have a Lentar present, T-mount 135/3.5 lens that I bought for a few bucks at a pawn shop. It is far better than it deserves to be, built very sturdily and excellent optically with beautiful bokeh. Even wide open it has a pleasing softness that doesn't merely look like mush - perfect for soft portraiture.

    But I saw another Lentar, a 28mm, in another pawn shop and the lens didn't impress me as being made to the same quality. So I passed on that one.

    I used to have a 28mm f/2.8 CPC in Canon FD mount, also purchased for a few bucks at a pawn shop. It was very sharp and contrasty and well corrected for closeups. But the bokeh was downright nasty. Still, it was a good lens and I used it until I sold all of my Canon gear and switched to Nikon. Since then I've seen other CPC stuff that, frankly, seemed like crap.

    Even if you find someone who's actually used a particular model their lens performance may not accurately indicate what you can expect. With some of these anonymous lens makers the quality control was so poor that you'd have to pick and choose from among a batch of the same lenses to get one that was worth owning.
  3. Telesar lenses can be really good - as good as a Nikon of that era.

    It'll probably beat your consumer 70-300 zoom anyway, and it's a stop faster.
  4. Maybe I'll give it a try.

    Thank you for the help fellows.
  5. I have a Telesor 100-200mm zoom lens I bought on eBay, and it works perfectly with my Nikon D50 DSLR. I am a complete newbie to SLR's and even I can get a good photo with it.:) Wendy
  6. I have a Telesor manual control 75-300mm lens that I have taken many great pictures with and have never had any problem with. I currently have it for sale for $100.00 becuase I just bought a new Nikon 70-300mm d Autofucus zoom lens that I now intend to use. I think you will greatly enjoy your new lens.

Share This Page