I have a quick question, I have a Nikon D3100 along with the kit lens. I am interested in upgrading the lens and I was wonding if the nikon nikkor af 70-300mm f/4-5.6 was a good choice. At the moment you can pick a second hand one up for around £80-£100. Do you think this to be good value? also does anyone have any shots taken with one of these lenses.
I'm no profesional photographer and dable with my DSLR from time to time hence why i don't want to spend a fortune.
I have a 70 - 300mm lens and I rarely use it. Unless you use a tripod this lens isn't that useful. Hand held at 300mm it is almost impossible to get a good shot.
IMHO an 18 - 200mm , a great all purpose lens, is a much better investment.
Depends on what you're shooting. I shoot wildlife and couldn't live without my 70-300. In fact, I just got a 400 zoom.
Also, on the 70-300 - almost 100% handheld! I don't think the exif shows on my shots because I process in programs other than lightroom sometimes, but take a look at my photos from the last couple months. Almost all 70-300 handheld.
Good question. I have the D3000 and just got the smaller kit lens so have both now. Wondering if I should trade the new smaller one in for a 35 or 50 or both in for the all in one, though I was thinking more the 18-200. So happy to have more than one lens now, though. Just a zoom was annoying at times.
My original camera came with a 70-300 along with the kit lens and I love it! It might not be the worlds fanciest lens, but considering the price I think it has been a great addition to my line up! It's very handy when I need a zoom until I can afford a proper telephoto. I haven't had a problem shooting hand held at 300mm, even though they might not be the absolute sharpest. Here are some of my favorites taken at 300mm, although mine is the canon lens on a t2i, FYI:
If you mean the older "G only" lens - Nikon number 1928, I think you would be disappointed. It will not auto focus on your D3100 (the camera has no internal motor) and it is not "VR" so shooting at 300mm (which comes out to a full frame equivalent of 450mm on your camera with this FX lens) would almost assuredly need a tripod unless your hands are very steady or you are shooting a faster shutter than 1/800. The optics are rather good though, especially on a cropped sensor camera, this being an FX lens, any edge softness is cropped away.
If you mean the newer ED IF lens (Nikon number 2161) it will autofocus and does have VR. But again, being an FX lens, I am not sure how useful you might find it, although I find my 70-200 works well for me on my APS-C cameras, including the D3100, for many shots. It weighs in at 28 ounces whereas the first is less than a pound, But I suspect this is not the lens you are referencing for 100 pounds.
For general purpose wide to telephoto use, the "super zooms" from Tamron 18-270 and Sigma 18-250 are worth a look. They re not professional glass by any means, no zoom at this range could be, but they do get the job done. The Sigma especially I like for its excellent Image stabilization (VC they call it, the Nikon VR) but the Tamron has a lot of merit as well. They are "DX" lenses, made especially for the cropped sensor cameras, and are consequently less than 20 ounces to hold.
@andy_holding I use the D3100 and a couple of other Nikon cameras I have the a few lenses a 70-300mm tamron lense its a good lense macro is very good but to be honest my favorite lense is the kit lense 18-55mm
I have the 70-300mm. I've had it for years. In fact mine predates digital cameras...there's no VR. It's as sweet as it ever was and critical for wildlife.
I'm still relatively a newbie I don't shoot Nikon, I shoot Canon. Anyway I bought a 70 - 300 mm lens. I hate that it doesn't get closer, and my kit lens 18 - 55mm doesn't get long enough. I'm in the market for an 18-200mm lens myself.
Another vote here for the Sigma 18-250mm as mentioned by @frankhymus . Obviously not as sharp as my prime lenses, but a fantastic compromise of versatility and quality. @randystreat
@andy_holding
As you'are not professional, and you probably want something all-round-use-ish, I'd suggest the Sigma DC 18-200mm !:3.5-6.3 zoom. It replaced both my 18-55mm and 50-200mm standard kit lenses. I love it to bits.
@frankhymus Thanks Frank. I am seriously considering them. Instead of renting I ran into someone the other day who had one. I held it and shot with it a bit. So I think I'm going to take the plunge.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
IMHO an 18 - 200mm , a great all purpose lens, is a much better investment.
Also, on the 70-300 - almost 100% handheld! I don't think the exif shows on my shots because I process in programs other than lightroom sometimes, but take a look at my photos from the last couple months. Almost all 70-300 handheld.
If you mean the newer ED IF lens (Nikon number 2161) it will autofocus and does have VR. But again, being an FX lens, I am not sure how useful you might find it, although I find my 70-200 works well for me on my APS-C cameras, including the D3100, for many shots. It weighs in at 28 ounces whereas the first is less than a pound, But I suspect this is not the lens you are referencing for 100 pounds.
For general purpose wide to telephoto use, the "super zooms" from Tamron 18-270 and Sigma 18-250 are worth a look. They re not professional glass by any means, no zoom at this range could be, but they do get the job done. The Sigma especially I like for its excellent Image stabilization (VC they call it, the Nikon VR) but the Tamron has a lot of merit as well. They are "DX" lenses, made especially for the cropped sensor cameras, and are consequently less than 20 ounces to hold.
Good Luck!
As you'are not professional, and you probably want something all-round-use-ish, I'd suggest the Sigma DC 18-200mm !:3.5-6.3 zoom. It replaced both my 18-55mm and 50-200mm standard kit lenses. I love it to bits.
I have Tamron 70-300 mm lens and I use it a lot, as a hybrid lens I use it for taking photos for a distance, like: http://365project.org/kiscsillag/365
But also good for close-ups, like http://365project.org/kiscsillag/365/2014-05-11
So I vote for the 70-300mm. It is a good compromise if the price counts