Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:29 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 6:49 pm 
Just thought I'd post a mini sort of review for the Nikon Owners out there who might be thinking about this lens, but wanted a few more 100% crops, and more shots of how it handles at 300mm.

Here are some crops of my 70-300 VR, that I took today;
(All images taken in Jpeg FINE mode)

The image itself (not uploaded at max res to save bandwidth);
Taken at 300mm, F.8, 300mm, VR on, 1/400s, Iso 200.
Image

and crops,

Difference in sharpness between f5.6 and f.8;
Image Image

I can see a difference personally, but I'd be surprised if that did show up in your average prints, not unless you plan to print bigger than A3.

Sharpened once in Adobe, for the first image, no sharpening to the 100 % crop that follows.


F11, 1/320s, Iso 200, 300mm
Image

Image


And a shot taken at 70mm, F8, 1/400s, Iso 200

Image

centre crop:
Image

Right side crop;
Image


Well as far as the optical quality, the crops speak for themselves, you either like the quality or you dont. I'm glad I got this lens, the results are sharp, although I can see you wishing you'd had the cash for a pro grade lens if you are a hard core pixel peeper.

But, for how light the lens is, the VR, the optical quality, price (I paid £305 in the UK), and the extra reachm you cant go wrong. :D

*edit* Added some shots of the lens on my D80:

Image

Image

Image

Image


Last edited by Gregory.Rotter on Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 4:25 pm 
nice to see difference in sharpness between f5.6 and f.8, good job!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:37 pm 
Hello Gregory.Rotter,

I have a question. I've decided to buy a D80 and have been agonizing as to whether to go for an 18-200 VR or the 18-70 / 70-300 VR combo you have. Maybe I'm imagining it, but after looking at A LOT of pictures from all of these (including yours, which are great, by the way), it seems to me the ones from the 18-70 / 70-300 combo are better somehow. They seem to have better color and contrast and to be slightly sharper, and simply put have more "life" to them. The pictures from the 18-200 seem to be abit dimmer and flatter. It's been my observation from what I've seen, anyway.
The big issue of course, and what I'd be interested in hearing from you, is just how big a pain and inconvenience do you find it to change the lenses while out shooting? I'll mostly be shooting around town, or out in the country, and more scenery and architecture than people. Just wondering what your experience has been in this regard. Do you often find yourself in a situation where you wish you had just the one lens? Or conversly, are you often glad you have the extra 100mm reach w the 70-300? I'd really appreciate some first hand feed back on this...

Thanks much!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:59 pm 
I understand the convenience of having one lens that does everything, but I view SLRs as cameras that give you the opportunity to change lens according to what you need, and one lens just won't do. I've grown very used to changing lenses and it doesn't inconvenience me. At events I rarely miss a shot because of the wrong lens - I'd just be using two bodies with two different focal length lenses which solves the problem.

As for the dimmer/flatter images from the 18-200, it will depend on the settings in-camera as well as the lens. From experience, there isn't a lot to choose between the sharpness of the 18-200 vs 18-70+70-300, but there is certainly better bokeh, less distortion, and the extra reach with the latter.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:06 am 
chsweep wrote:
Hello Gregory.Rotter,

I have a question. I've decided to buy a D80 and have been agonizing as to whether to go for an 18-200 VR or the 18-70 / 70-300 VR combo you have. Maybe I'm imagining it, but after looking at A LOT of pictures from all of these (including yours, which are great, by the way), it seems to me the ones from the 18-70 / 70-300 combo are better somehow. They seem to have better color and contrast and to be slightly sharper, and simply put have more "life" to them. The pictures from the 18-200 seem to be abit dimmer and flatter. It's been my observation from what I've seen, anyway.
The big issue of course, and what I'd be interested in hearing from you, is just how big a pain and inconvenience do you find it to change the lenses while out shooting? I'll mostly be shooting around town, or out in the country, and more scenery and architecture than people. Just wondering what your experience has been in this regard. Do you often find yourself in a situation where you wish you had just the one lens? Or conversly, are you often glad you have the extra 100mm reach w the 70-300? I'd really appreciate some first hand feed back on this...

Thanks much!


Well, the thing is that I have had the 18-70 for just over a year now, and I have gotten so used to shooting wide, that I am actually using the 70-300 less than I thought I'd be. I mean, I will only REALLY use it when I am either doing some street photography,and need to get in closer, or if I am at a sporting even in the out doors (as we all know this isnt an f2,8 lens), or watching birds, or capturing wildlife. I shoot alot of nature/landscape/ stuff and so for that purpose the 18-70 does most of the work.

No I don't mind changing lenses. The thing is, I wouldnt need to compose the shot that much to the extent that I'd need to zoom from 18 mm to 200 say. It's either going to be a wide shot, or a very close up or tele range shot. At the end of the day, I tend to know what I am going out looking to shoot. I do take my 70-300 along with me, but I more or less know which lens I will be using.

Be sure to search Flickr for 18-200 VR as you can find many more examples of what that lens is capable of. Flickr link of 'interesting shots' taken with 18-200 VR

As you can see, the lens does produce good images. I originally wanted the 18-200, because it meant not getting dust on my D80 sensor, not missing a shot while changing a lens and so on, but at the time, that lens was in great demand and prices were inflated. So I found an 18-70 new, but window model for much cheaper than it retails for and went for it.
It just happened that there would be a zoom lens with VR, that was a decent price, with an extra 100mm for me out there haha.

However, alot of people have said that the 70-300 produces sharper results than the 18-200, at least up to 200. The results arent as sharp from 200-300 after that, but only by a little and stopping down to f11 helps things. The build quality is also said to be a little better, as there is no zoom creep like on most 18-200mm out there. It all depends on your needs and your budget. I'm happy with what I went for.

Heres a link to 'most interesting' shots on the 70-300 on flickr;
70-300 VR


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 10:21 pm 
Well after many months of owning this lens I thought I'd give you guys a recap and share some thoughts now that I have a good feel for what this lens can produce.

As most of you probably know, this is no pro grade lens and so is not for indoor/without flash use. So far, I've mostly used this lens for some street photography, but for other shots as well. I've made a set on my flickr to show how versatile this lens can be (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregtherot ... 652780122/ ) .

A few weeks ago, I was thinking how I was really quite unimpressed with the sharpness of the lens even at 200mm, so decided to see if the filter I had on it was having any effect on the quality of the images. Turns out it was. So now I just use my 18-70 with just the lens hood and no filter, and use my Hoya SHMC Pro1 UV filter, which doesn't effect the i.q (it was a regular Hoya HMC version that was the dud). I guess what I want to say is, that if you know it's limitations this lens really is well worth the money. I bought mine for roughly 300 GBP (pound sterling) from amazon UK. Funny that it's actually more expensive now than when I got mine :lol:

Regards,
-Greg


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:15 pm 
I have this lens for like 11 months now...

Its perfect.

This is a very affordable lens due its quality.

Until 200mm, its a monster. Very good IQ.

Impressive image at 70mm.

VR is very good.

I found a very good use to photograph birds, animals and guess... portrait shots.

Check some nice shots I have with this at my webpage:

http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 3593_Sg5go
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 7374_z7CkB
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 4923_VS7a9
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 2043_bkyi5
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 6413_kQKB8
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 4290_EoKoq
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 6943_o2gCz
http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 7439_jBk7Q


The last one is a 100% crop of a moon shot at 300mm. You can see a lot of detail, including the lunar craters on the darker side of the moon:


http://www.carloshackmannphotography.co ... 8130_hHWxk

Cheerz!


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group