Nikkor 70-300mm F 4.0- F 5.6

[mtclimber]

I have found the Nikkor 70-300mm F 4.0 lens advertised as sort of being any equivalent to the Nikkor 55-200mm lens but with a bitmore reach. Does anyone have any experience with this lens?

MT

[JimC]

Go to http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Then, scroll down to the bottom of the page and select Nikkor AF(-S) & AI-S Lenses from the User Performance Surveys section.

On the following page, leave everything at defaults and press the Start Query button.

You'll find this Nikkor in the list.

Users rate it's performance on the wide and long end of the lens as Poor at wide open apertures and stopped down on a DSLR (separate rating for it when used on APS-C size sensor), with an overall optical quality rating of 0.97 (Very Poor) on a scale of 1 to 5 with 11 users responding to the survey.

That's pretty bad.

[mtclimber]

Thanks very much JimC-

For your valuable input. That pretty much answers my question. I had been pleased with the Nikkor 55-200mm, so I was holding positive thoughts for the Nikkor 70-300mm.

That is the value of asking for help. Thanks so much for your help.

MT

[morrobay]

If you are talking about the 70-300 ED version, I do not agree that it is a poor performer. Here are some simple snapshots taken with mine on a D70 a couple of years ago. Nothing scientific, just some hand held shots.

Ifyou know how to handle it, and understand its limitations, this lenscan providea lot bang forthe buck.



http://morrobayphotos.com/Snapshots

Marc

[rey]

I have the 70-300G (the cheap one) and I'm pretty satisfied with it. I must say though that from my purchase, I got that lens *virtually* free.

I wouldn't buy it if you already have the 55-200 since the difference between 200mm and 300mm is negligible. For reference purposes, the difference between a 70mm and 100mm is much greater. Also if I have to but a 70-300, I'd go with the Sigma DG APO for its Macro capability.

Anyways, the 70-300G is not a great indoor lens, it needs a lot of light, and it does seek a lot, and focuses slow. That being said, I think the ".97 / 5" rating is not accurate. That's a German website, and only 11 people replied, so I wouldn't put too much credibility on it.

From my own tests, my subjective results are:

70-300 @70mm
=============
f/5.6 OK
f/8.0 Good

70-300 @100mm
==============
f/5.6 OK
f/8.0 Good

70-300 @200mm
==============
f/5.6 OK
f/8.0 Good

70-300 @300mm
==============
f/8 OK
f/11 Good


Full Moon. This was the "Basic" shot of Raw+Basic setting. Cropped and enlarged to 200%.



This shots was taken on a sunny day, but shot against the sun, about 35ft away, handheld @300mm. Resized, but not post processed:


This photo is 100% cropped of above with no post processing.



Other shots from this lens are here:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...528167#p528167

'Hope this helps.