55-300mm -- what's the story?

[Franko170]

Originally Posted by Wizzard0003

Wow...!

I've never heard of a defective hood...!

But your images look great...!

As someone had posted another thread of the same subject, I thought I'd bring this thread up again to show some sample images - besides being pissed off about the stupid lens hood.

edit:

Here's a shot I took the other day with the 55-300 at a swim meet. No, I wouldn't want to shoot a swim meet available light with this lens only. I used a different lens for most of the shots, just wanted to see what I could get with it.

This shot is with a D90, 3200 iso available light at 240mm (picture cropped to about 2/3 of what it was), at f 5.3, 125th of a second. Focus really wasn't that much of a problem for indoor swimming, but it's too slow of a shutter speed.


One very minor point of getting the extra reach of a 55-300 over the 55-200 is gaining about a third to a half an fstop, depending on the focal length used - the 55-200 would have been at 5.6 at 200mm, while the 55-300 might be at f5.

[Wizzard0003]

Even considering the slow shutter it still came out quite decent... The shot
conveys energy and action...

[Logo10heli]

Franko170...

Nice looking photos. Any chance you could post some outdoor photos taken on an overcast day ?

Is it possible to get good action shots zoomed-in on overcast days ?

This lens may be more beneficial to me than the 55-200. I would likely purchase a D3100 to pair it with.

[tclune]

Of course, you could get the 55-200 and the 35mm f/1.8 both for about the same cost as that lens alone...

[Franko170]

Originally Posted by Logo10heli

Franko170...

Nice looking photos. Any chance you could post some outdoor photos taken on an overcast day ?

Is it possible to get good action shots zoomed-in on overcast days ?

This lens may be more beneficial to me than the 55-200. I would likely purchase a D3100 to pair it with.

I will try and find time to shoot some overcast pics. I'm in Ohio, and at the moment there's 4-5 inches of snow on the ground and a single digit wind chill.

I am planning to cover baseball and softball in the spring with this lens, and expect it to take good shots. The 55-300 makes more sense for me as the further reach will help me get close, and in focus pictures. The VR will remove my 'less steady than 20 years ago hands' effect when capturing action.

If a faster shutter speed is needed on overcast days, I break out my old first generation Sigma HSM 70-200 2.8. (I also have a 70-300 4-5.6 APO Macro Sigma lens that is on its last legs).

My understanding is that the 3100 is about the same quality of photos at higher ISOs as is the D90, so should see very similar results with the 55-300 vr.