Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:20 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:50 pm 
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


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:55 pm 
I notice that cheaper looking one, won't touch that one. Anyway, is there such thing as a VRII 70-300mm.

Thanks


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 5:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:54 am 
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.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:27 am 
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.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
Yeah - you definitely don't want it for the VR, helping to get sharper photos under 1/500th second on crop sensors

D'oh!

:shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:01 am 
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. :wink:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:57 am 
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...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
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.


Last edited by dubaiphil on Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
Image

f5.6 @ ISO3200 - wide open?

acceptable sharpness?


Last edited by dubaiphil on Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
Image

f5.6 @ ISO3200 - acceptable?


Last edited by dubaiphil on Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
300mm - acceptable?

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1822
@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



Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:13 am 
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.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:  

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