lens quality question

[Grandpaw]

A friend of mine wants to get the Nikon D90 with the 18-105 VR kit lens and the 70-300 VR kit lens for his wife. He was wondering about the quality of these two lenses. We have read some reviews but would like to get some opinions from some folks here that know about them. I might add that she is a knowledgeable photographer, Thanks for any input you may give, Jeff

[Singletracklovr]

I use the 70-300 on my d80. I like the picture quality but the lens is heavy and even at 300mm (450 on the d80) I always feel I need more reach. I wish I would have gone with the 70-400mm.

[Grandpaw]

I use the 70-300 on my d80. I like the picture quality but the lens is heavy and even at 300mm (450 on the d80) I always feel I need more reach. I wish I would have gone with the 70-400mm.

Thanks Bob for taking the time to answer my post. This is helpful and we are looking for as many opinions as we can get before ordering, Jeff

[AgingEyes]

70-300 is one of the best bang for the bucks lenses out there and it is light in weight. It is generally agreed that from 70-200 it is sharp, sharp, sharp. Then it becomes soft. You want better sharpness and resolution? Get the 70-200 f2.8, but check the price first. I have the 70-300 and I'm still using it..

Here's some of shots taken with that lens recently (converted to jpeg from raw plus pp):








70-300 is a full frame lens and so it works with D700, D3 and D3x. Some said the results are much better than with DX camera even at 300mm.

And if you want more reach, 80-400f4.5-5.6, 200-400f4, 400f2.8, 500f4 and 600f4 are the choices out there. Again, check the prices - and the weight - of those for comparison.

BTW, 70-300 cannot be used with Nikon TCs.

[A.M.D.A.]

AgingEyes -

I'm also kind of looking at this lens, due to it being priced quite affordably and also good enough for birds. Perhaps matched with a D40/D40X/D60 or a D90.

Are these shots you posted here taken at the 300mm end? They are really sharp... :thumbsup:

[AgingEyes]

AgingEyes -

I'm also kind of looking this lens, due to it being priced quite affordably and also good enough for birds. Are these shots you posted here taken at the 300mm end? They are really sharp... :thumbsup:

Yes, they all were shot at 300mm, ISO 800. The flying pigeon (cropped) with f5.6, the sparrow with f6.3 around 1/500sec. The hawk with f8 1/500 ISO1600 (cropped).

Here's another one of subjects farther away and different lighting (cropped and pp). All bald eagles:



Mind you, I shoot raw and so I do post-processing to my photos. But, if you have to shoot at 300mm, stop down if you can to get better result.

This one I stopped down quite a bit. Don't quite remember now but perhaps around f8 or f11 (on tripod):

[mattbikeboy]

I liked the image quality of my 70-300 -- as long as it was outside in good light. Under lights (high school and/or community sports) and in darker shadowy areas it was slooooooow to focus.

I bought the 80-200 f2.8 last year and lost some reach -- but so much better in low light and general high speed performance. I bought 200-400 f4 and haven't really had the chance to get to know her yet. :smilewinkgrin:

mbb

[AgingEyes]

Under lights (high school and/or community sports) and in darker shadowy areas it was slooooooow to focus.

mbb

I wouldn't call it "sloooooow" to focus. The situations you describe slow down the focus regardless of the lenses. I just recently had my 300f2.8 +1.7TC couldn't focus, too, in heavy fog. Under good light with good contrast, all lenses focus faster.

80-200f2.8 is another good option. But it is an older lens, costs more, weigh more, and without VR.

Here's a shot with the short end of 70-300 on fujifilm S5: 70mm f7.1 1/400sec. ISO 3200:

[Grandpaw]

A friend of mine wants to get the Nikon D90 with the 18-105 VR kit lens and the 70-300 VR kit lens for his wife. He was wondering about the quality of these two lenses. We have read some reviews but would like to get some opinions from some folks here that know about them. I might add that she is a knowledgeable photographer, Thanks for any input you may give, Jeff

Thanks to everyone for your input! He ordered this combination yesterday and hopefully she will be happy with it, Jeff

[blazing fire]

Here's a shot with the short end of 70-300 on fujifilm S5: 70mm f7.1 1/400sec. ISO 3200:

f/7.1, ISO 3200, 1/400 second?

That's a fast shutter speed at the setting. Is it not?

[Grandpaw]

f/7.1, ISO 3200, 1/400 second?

That's a fast shutter speed at the setting. Is it not?

Yes that is a fast SHUTTER SPEED but AgingEyes was talking about FOCUSING SPEED which is a totally different thing all together, Jeff

[Singletracklovr]

Here's a shot with the short end of 70-300 on fujifilm S5: 70mm f7.1 1/400sec. ISO 3200: -AgingEyes

ISO 3200 !?!

Oh my...I can't wait to try that. I can't believe how noise free that photo is. Wow.

[blazing fire]

Yes that is a fast SHUTTER SPEED but AgingEyes was talking about FOCUSING SPEED which is a totally different thing all together, Jeff

Yes .

Is that a fast shutter speed considering the lighting conditions and small aperture?

[Dylan8i]

Yes .

Is that a fast shutter speed considering the lighting conditions and small aperture?

not with the iso set to 3200

[blazing fire]

not with the iso set to 3200

I see. Thanks!

[Grandpaw]

I see. Thanks!

Just so you know, the shutter speed could have been faster if he had chosen to change the F stop to a larger opening and allow for a faster shutter speed on the same shot. Due to the fact the camera used F7.1, I would guess that he was shooting shutter priority or manual and picking the shutter speed as his first choice. This shutter speed chosen was high enough to stop the action and also allow this F-stop for greater depth of field. By picking a shutter speed high enough to stop action and not go as high as he could he got the best of both the ability to stop action and get the greater depth of field for the best all around shot. This is my opinion and may not be what he did but I think I guessed right, Jeff