Some reviews about the new Nikon 70300 VR

[dirk]

Hi

since I am in the buying decision for a telezoom, I was considering the 80-200/2.8, 70-200/2.8 VR and the new 70-300 VR.

Since the latter one is pretty new, it is hard to finde real life information about it. So I surfed and collected some interesting links with reports about & images made with the the 70-300 VR.

http://www.discoveryforyoureyes.com/pro/index.html (also some images)

http://filmlives.net/content/articles/lenses/telephoto/Nikon70300VR/

http://www.bythom.com/70300VRlens.htm (which is the most critical one with that lens)

Although the last link points out some disadvanteges, it seems that this new telezoom is a really good value for the money. Significant better then its predecessors.

Unfortunately I have not seen yet any comparison with the Nikon 80-200/2.8 and/or 70-200 VR.

If you find something on the net about it, please post here...

 

[walterfr]

Hello Dirk

There is nothing comparable about the features from a 70-200 VR 2.8; even the new Nikon 70-300 it is only something for "hobby shooters" (sorry guys). If you are looking for something real - pls. take the 70-200 VR 2.8 and you are happy about your purchase.

kind regards from Paris ( no - not Paris Hilton)

Walter

 

[gjames52]

http://www.discoveryforyoureyes.com/pro/index.html (also some images) >

Dirk:

The images from Clint Thayer's website using the 70mm 300mm VR convinces me that it is a lens I would reach for. I'd say some Contax shooters would be happy with the results too, including me. He stated that made a photograph at 300 mm at 1/13 of a second. VR would a welcome feature on my cameras.

If you occasionally photograph birds a 300 mm lens will provide a larger image, it is also lighter, responsive, somewhat compact, and for the money I don't think you can go wrong. Actually, the reduced weight you wouldn't mind carry the 24 mm 120 mm VR I mentioned. Perhaps for the price you could get 2 for 1.

Regards:

Gilbert

 

[dirk]

walter.Fr (Walterfr) wrote on January 18:

' 2007 - 10:18 pm,even the new Nikon 70-300 it is only something for "hobby shooters"'

I agree, but still it can be theoretically on par with a 70-200 VR since lens design is easier to make for zooms with apertures of 3.5-5.6

The only downside in lens design is, that it is 300mm and not 200mm. This makes the lens design again more difficult.

But I had already the "wow" effect with Contax Zeiss N zooms, with which the lighter one (more for the hobby photographers) N70-200 was actually better than the Zeiss N70-300. So as long as I do not see comparisons, I do not believe anymore the marketing departments of the producers

As far as I have read reviews, the 70-200VR is for ex&le not better in image quality than the "older" Nikon 80-200/2.8 D ED, but costs over 40% more.

So if you do not need the VR, you get the same image quality cheaper and save weight too (1.4KG vs. 1.3KG)

 

[dirk]

Gilbert James (Gjames52) wrote on January 19:

' 2007 - 1:37 am,Contax shooters would be happy with the results too'

Zeiss should offer the N70-200/3.5-4.5 without AF for Nikon mount. As a ZF lens. This would give Nikon 70-200 VR users a run for the money...

 

[gjames52]

Dirk wrote on January 19:

' 2007 - 10:45 am,Zeiss should offer the N70-200/3.5-4.5 without AF for Nikon mount. As a ZF lens. This would give Nikon 70-200 VR users a run for the money... '

Dirk:

Certainly it would. On the other side of that issue, after Zeiss announced the ZF and other lenses. I wrote Zeiss and told them that I was disappointed in that I did not see anything about being able to add any lenses to my Contax, G or Contax N collection...I also mentioned that I felt they should show some loyalty to their customers.

I received a kind reply from Mr. Mueller stating that Kyocera had some proprietary aspects of the auto focus system so they could not make the lenses.

Good Luck:

Gilbert

 

[don_c]

I got my 70mm-300mm last week and I love it. I use it a lot for taking wildlife shots when I am out working and it really does do a great job of reaching out there and bringing the subjects in for me.

 

[don_c]

I could not be any happier than I am with this lens..the 75-300 and the 18-200mm.

 

[old_admin_CI]

Don Cotten (Don_c) wrote on June 19:

' 2007 - 5:08 am,I could not be any happier than I am with this lens..the 75-300 and the 18-200mm.'

That sounds good. I hear everywhere only good reviews about the 70-300 VR. I will buy one in a few weeks. I just can not convince myself for the so much heavier 70-200/2.8...

 

[gjames52]

Gentlemen:

My wife has been using her 70-300 VR and 24-120mm VR for a number of months and is very happy with them. I find they focus very fast and the VR is just outstanding. I was amazed how well it works, especially with the 70-300. I wish I had is on all of my lenses. I must confess I cannot hold my N body 70-300 as steady. I experimented with both 70-300 lenses focusing on the door jam spacing on an automobile, the VR really impressed me.

Regards:

Gilbert