- This topic is empty.
Which 70-300mm
-
I hope to get myself a Nikon D90 in the near future and was wanting another lens to offer more zoom and was thinking of a 70 – 300mm.
what I have looked at –
Nikon AF-S VR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED Lens (at over £400 this one is out of my buget)
Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Macro £169
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro £149
Which of the bottom 2 would be best and would they be fine for a beginner ?
Nikon also made an AF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6D ED. Not made any more…. Super lens, I still have mine, not for sale im afraid.
Bermingham in Dublin have one 2nd hand for sale see link http://www.berminghamcameras.ie/store/index.php?target=products&product_id=4182″ onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
Check if the D90 can take a non AFS lens first though if your interested
Just another idea
MNikon 70-300 VR is the only good choice. Other nikons were good for analog cameras. With digital ones they are poor.
You can consider sigma (rather the APO version) or tamron, but they are slow and noisy. They aren’t worse than non AF-S nikons 70-300, but you get a bonus of a macro mode (only 1:2 reproduction, but quite useful).Piotr M wrote:
Nikon 70-300 VR is the only good choice. Other nikons were good for analog cameras. With digital ones they are poor.
Sorry but what a load of crap… Allot of the older analog lenses are seriously sharp and have lovely bokeh and contrast that produce lovely pictures on digital cameras. In some cases the quality off these lenses is better than nikons modern lenses e.g. the 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 which I own so I am able to compare. The only thing they don’t have is autofocus with the exception of the pre afs lenses ie the AF-D lenses….
Martin wrote:
Piotr M wrote:
Nikon 70-300 VR is the only good choice. Other nikons were good for analog cameras. With digital ones they are poor.
Sorry but what a load of crap… Allot of the older analog lenses are seriously sharp and have lovely bokeh and contrast that produce lovely pictures on digital cameras. In some cases the quality off these lenses is better than nikons modern lenses e.g. the 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 which I own so I am able to compare. The only thing they don’t have is autofocus with the exception of the pre afs lenses ie the AF-D lenses….
No offense Martin, but we are talking only about 70-300 ones. There are two other nikon zooms in this range and both were quite good in analog times (AF-D and AF G), but not so good for digital photography. No matter what Ken Rockwell says.
I never wrote that other AFD or even older lenses cannot be better than new AFS.Piotr M wrote:
There are two other nikon zooms in this range and both were quite good in analog times (AF-D and AF G), but not so good for digital photography. No matter what Ken Rockwell says.
No offense Piotr, but this is the first time I’ve seen Ken Rockwell mentioned.
He does, however, according to what he says, make his own tests and publishes his own results.He makes pictures, and shows comparisons.
Any chance you could back up some of your arguments? (not the straw man ones)
Or, at least tell us how you come to your conclusions about such a broad range of optics?
If it’s not as a result of your own testing, perhaps you could cite references?
If you have tested, then some pictures would be great-No offense, but Lenses seems to be your chosen forum,
you have an opinion on just about everything posted here-
but I never see you post pictures-I have been doing a bit more thinking about this and had a look around at what was available and came accross the Tamron 18-270mm. Ok it is more than I would like to pay but it may be a good all round lens.
Any feedback on this lens would be a great help.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
