Camera Labs

I am looking to get a 70mm-300mm nikon lens but i'm bit confuse I notice there are some versions that say VRI and the other says VRII in the description on websites selling them. I would like to know what the differences are if there are any. Also how does one differentiate between the two just by looking at them.

Thanks

It's the same lens.

There's two current versions of the 70-300mm:

VR and the cheaper non-VR.

Don't touch that non-VR version - go for the VR and you've got yourself a very capable and quality piece of glass for the price.

Or go for the non-VR, use it, realise it's not very good, try to sell it at not too much of a loss and then get the VR

I notice that cheaper looking one, won't touch that one. Anyway, is there such thing as a VRII 70-300mm.

Thanks

The lens is physically labelled VR

The lens had VR II built in, which is the second incarnation of Nikon's Vibration Reduction

The first incarnation offered up to 3 stops effective VR, whereas mark II offers up to 4 stops effective VR

I've never seen a VR I version listed but anyway, Nikon never made one. There is a 70-300 AF and a 70-300 VR AF-S. The latter is the one you want.

_________________
Graham
Flickr

The nikkor 70-300 lens you want is the

Nikkor 70-300mm F4.5-F5.6 G ED VR. you actually dont want it for the VR but you want it for the excellent ED glass which makes razor sharp pictures if stopped down a bit.

Yeah - you definitely don't want it for the VR, helping to get sharper photos under 1/500th second on crop sensors

D'oh!

Honestly the VR is the only reason I would get that particular one... maybe the Nikon brand name if I was thinking about resale value. It isn't particularly sharp wide open, and at f/5.6 on the long end, stopping down isn't always fun. I prefer the IQ of the Tamron equivalent at roughly the same price but I prefer the way Nikon's VR works. I might be biased because I did end up getting one, but I picked it for a reason.

_________________
Graham
Flickr

For the money it is a really sharp lens (stopped down) but it is not a prime lens or a $1500 24-70mm F2.8 professional nikkor lens.

I make photos at 1/100sec @300mm without VR and its still sharp on my DX camera (D7000).

Maybe you should stay off the cafeine for a while if you don't manage to get anything sharp below 1/500secs...

C'mon then - money where your ample mouth is please....!

You can't have a good copy if it's only sharp stopped down, by the way.

True - it's not a 300mm f2.8, but try packing that in your backpack with other lenses.



I'll reiterate, as someone who actually uses this lens and can post viable examples, that it's very good value for money and has excellent IQ for the money.

f5.6 @ ISO3200 - wide open?

acceptable sharpness?

f5.6 @ ISO3200 - acceptable?

300mm - acceptable?

@f5.6 again - plenty sharp enough.

Where you'll really notice the difference is with the bokeh and separation compared to a 300mm f4 or f2.8, but for the money and convenience it ain't bad

Dubailphil, not sure if that was directed at me but I didn't mean to knock the len's sharpness wide open. Merely pointing out that there are better performers wide open in the 70-300 range.

_________________
Graham
Flickr