Nikon 70-300 VR: Telephoto best choice on budget

[andrea_magugliani]

<p>I just wanted to share with anyone interested in purchasing this lens this picture I took with my reliable D300 in Singapore at the Jurong Birds Sanctuary. The pictures where taken at 300mm 800 ISO, f/5.6 s1/100.<br>

I read on DxOMark that it is among the recommended lenses for the D800 and D600. I couldn't agree more!</p><div></div>

[richard_thomas9]

<p>Great shot! What's he eating? Looks like he has Predator mouth. Lol!</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Nice. I love my copy of this lens on my D90.</p>

[evannorth]

<p>i used this lens for about 4 years before moving up to the 300 f4 af-s and tc 14ii. my copy of the 70-300 vrii was pretty sharp at 300 mm too. i used to stop down to f8 using auto iso on the d7000 for good results even with fairly heavy cropping, often in poor light.</p>

[pge]

<p>Here is my 70-300mm vr story. <br /> Recently I was reaching for my only Sigma lens (12-24mm) and knocked my 70-300mm vr off the shelf. It hit the floor. No marks on the lens whatsoever as it was in its little black bag at the time. I tested the lens and although everything else was fine, the vr did not engage. I drove it to Nikon (only 25 minutes away) and showed them the receipt to prove that it was only 4 1/2 years old, still in warranty. They took it, they did not ask me any questions about how it was damaged and they returned it repaired in 3 days, no charge. Great lens.</p><div></div>

[jimcee]

<p>I recently purchased a Tamron 70-300mm VC (Tamron's nomenclature for a VR lens). This lens tested well on DxOMark in comparison to other Nikon mount DX lens.</p>

<p>http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/262/%28brand%29/Nikkor/%28camera1%29/614/%28lens2%29/281/%28brand2%29/Tamron/%28camera2%29/614/%28lens3%29/510/%28brand3%29/Sigma/%28camera3%29/614</p>

<p>Here's a photo that I took during an outing last week at the Arizona Sonora Desert Museum (settings: f/5.6, ISO 200, 1/90s, 300mm-DX 450mm):<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/17119612&size=lg</p>

<p>This lens is also attractively priced at $449.00 with a $100.00 mail-in rebate, final price $339.00.</p>

<p>Jim</p>

<p> </p>

[tony_demonte]

<p>I love my copy of the 70-300mm VR. I got my a year ago or so and have sense wondered how a great lens like the 70-300mm is under $600. I'm currently saving some money for the 80-400mm lens that just came out. most likely, I will be renting a copy before actually buying one since it is a big purchase.</p>

[Gup]

<p>Captivating shot, James. We've recently had several cougar sightings within a few kilometres of my home so I'm looking over my shoulder a lot these days.</p>

[kate_compton]

<p>Great lens, I got mine last month and I am loving it.<br /> One question though, when the shutter is half pressed it makes a rather noisy clicking (or ticking) sound. It is from VR I guess, is this normal? I don't have this kind of noise on my 18-105.<br /> <br />Cameta currently has the refurbished one on sale for $339. It comes with 90 day warranty from Nikon and additional 9 months warranty from Cameta. I am not sure if I can post the link here.<br /> If you search for this lens on their website it shows $359, change the number at the end of url from 27552 to 75101, it changes to $339. FYI, I received this sale link in the email from Cameta.</p>

[peteraitch]

<p>Upgraded to the VR version from the ED version when I got my D700 and the ED version proved very soft during initial testing of the new body. Got a good trade-in and have never regretted the switch. It's a great lens (but works best when I remember to turn on the VR!) and good value.<br>

Only a measly 12-month warranty here in the UK, though, so Phil Evans' story would have a very different ending. Nikon's regional marketing antics (not just warranties) really irritate me: they're so focused on not being ripped off that they end up alienating their loyal customer base.<br>

Lovely shots, BTW.</p>

[mike_c20]

<p>I got this lens when I had my D300 and it is the only one that has survived my lens "purges" over the years. Hard to beat the reach, weight and quality for the price.</p>

<p><a title="Hover by cZulander, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3174/3046267951_866df5ca77_b.jpg" alt="Hover" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p>

[kohanmike]

<p>I had one and found it to be very sharp and clean, even at 300mm and wide open. This shot was with my past D70s.</p>

<p>Since then I moved to a D300s and when I got a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 HMS, I decided it cut into the focal length of the 70-300 too much, so I traded in the 70-300 for a Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 OS HMS. But just recently I came into some money and got the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS HMS for a good price (since it is being replaced by a new USB version) and a 1.4x teleconverter, so now I'm selling the Sigma 120-400.</p><div></div>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>I purchased both this and the Tamron. I kept the Tamron...</p>

<p>Shot from about a half mile above...</p><div></div>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>…and here is a crop 100%</p><div></div>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>BTW, since the new 80-400Vr hit, I have seen the older version drop in used prices to around 700. At that price, its a great purchase IMO. Better a used one of the 80-400 than a new 70-300vr or Vc IMO.</p>

<p>However, better glass weighs more and is larger. For travel and general photography, its not bad but not great, whereas the 70-300 is great for that purpose.</p>

[richard_driscoll]

<p>Has anyone compared the 70-300 VR with the 55-300 VR DX on DX body?<br>

Is the VR better? Nikon claim that the 55-300 has VRII (4 stops gain rather than 3) but the lens lacks the extra VR switch.<br>

Is the AF quicker?<br>

Is it sharper? It's probably more robust but is it also bigger and heavier because it has to cover FX and is an older design?</p>