Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR (5.5x)
#1
Hi to all. I'm new in DSLR business and I need advice if this is a good buy for quality. Some of my friends suggest to get AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED (4.3x)FX format.



Thank You
#2
[quote name='Darek' timestamp='1306770048' post='8939']

Hi to all. I'm new in DSLR business and I need advice if this is a good buy for quality. Some of my friends suggest to get AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED (4.3x)FX format.



Thank You

[/quote]

The reviews here might help you decide...

Another to consider is the Tamron 70-300mm Di SP USD VC (!) It's had good reviews here and elsewhere, and gets consistently good feedback from folk here who use it.
#3
I have it and I like it.

Build quality is, well, a bit cheap. (similar or a bit better than the 18-55VR)

Front lens rotates.

No AF A/M override.

But it is cheap and sharp and light weight and smaller compared to the AF-S 70-300VR, optical quality is good.



If you need a good zoom and don't want to spend a lot of money and like it light weight on a small DX like the D5000 or D3100 then this lens is for you.



Also, the 55-300 range is nice.

70 is very often already to long.

55 is a good start.



Personally, if you only compare the optical quality, and don't need FX, I don't need the 70-300VR and am much better of with the 55-300VR.

But others might have a different view.
#4
[quote name='IanCD' timestamp='1306781558' post='8940']

The reviews here might help you decide...

Another to consider is the Tamron 70-300mm Di SP USD VC (!) It's had good reviews here and elsewhere, and gets consistently good feedback from folk here who use it.

[/quote]

I'd seen reviews of the 55-300, and thought I'd seen a comparison between the two Nikons (55-300 and 70-300) some months ago. I was looking for it earlier... can't find it now.



The reviews linked below may help while there's no 55-300 review here. Both 70-300s are.

Markus: is the 55-300 one of your 10 upcoming DX reviews?



Fairly clear that image quality will be better with either 70-300 than with the 55-300, but they are heavier (better build quality).


#5
[quote name='IanCD' timestamp='1306795055' post='8942']

Markus: is the 55-300 one of your 10 upcoming DX reviews?

[/quote]



Unfortunately not. But it is on my list. In fact, I could write a review about most of the zoom range already, but would have to leave out the 300mm setting <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />



More seriously: I'm trying to run a batch of 300mm tests on DX, soon, but need a good location. Maybe Sebastian can help out, he seems to have enough space indoors.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#6
I'll be happy to see the reviews.

(I hope it is allowed to say this here: A guy named AndyE posted some tests with the 55-300 against a few other lenses in the NFF - and the 55-300 is not the worst, depending on what you want to shoot)



I can't make any meaningful tests. But I did a personal comparison based on "stomach feelings" between a D90 + 70-300VR and my D5000 + 55-300VR. And I don't see much of a difference in picture quality. I even find my 55-300 at f8 and 300mm sharper.



Honestly, if I would have a D90 or 300 and would not worry about the size and weight, I would choose the 70-300VR just because it feels better.



But with a D5000 (or similar small D40, D3100, D5100...) and an overall small and lightweight equipment that I did choose intentionally, the 55-300VR is a much better fit.

If you don't need the 300mm and would be ok with 200mm, then take the even cheaper 55-200VR, because it has about the same optical quality. In my opinion it is even sharper at 200mm. (I have both. The 55-200VR makes a pretty decent "Makro lens" with a cheap Raynox 150 in front)

I only "needed" the 55-300mm, because for taking a few bird pictures 200mm was just to short and 300mm is the longest I could get for low price.



(if picture links are not wanted, I'll remove them right away - pls let me know)



ISO3200, f6.3, 300mm, horrifying settings, still ok

[Image: DSC_7097_vnx2_N_c.jpg]



ISO200, f8, 300mm, with good light and f8 no worries

[Image: DSC_7586_vnx2_c.jpg]



ISO400, f8, 300mm, it is even suitable for close-ups with built-in flash

[Image: DSC_6460_vnx2_c.jpg]
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)