Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4,5-5,6GED VR Experience?

rebdix

rebdix

Messages
32
Name
Rebecca
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, has anyone had any experience with this zoom? How fast is the motor for the autofocus? How well does the stabiliser work? Do I need a tripod to take photos of tennis players stood about 10-20m away from me? Can I use this zoom for portraits too? I am a beginner with a Nikon D5100. So far my photos have been ok but I really would like to try sport phtography and am not sure what zoom to buy. Would appreciate any help you can provide. thanks Rebecca
 
No problems with mine, used on a D200. I tend to use the 55-200 on my D5200.
Not the fastest at focusing but fast enough for me as I don't do sports photography.
It's okay for portraits if you stick to the lower focal lengths. VR works well for a couple of stops extra stabilisation.

I found the 55-200 a bit faster at focusing and a bit sharper overall, but not a lot in it.
(Edit 70)Sample with 70-300

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kendunton/20245471228/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kendunton/20407850806/in/dateposted-public/
 
Last edited:
I had one of these a few years ago. It's a great lens considering it's cost. Focus speed is ok, not as fast as a f4 lens but unless you regularly use a f4 lens you wouldn't notice. I tried a little football with it and it did ok. It was only amateur football but it capture sharp images. The only problem is keeping a high shutter speed with the minimum aperture being f5.6 as I struggled late afternoon. For portraits it may be a bit long and slow. You be better off with something in the 17-55 range for portraits especially indoors.
 
Last edited:
rebdix said:
Hi, has anyone had any experience with this zoom? How fast is the motor for the autofocus? How well does the stabiliser work? Do I need a tripod to take photos of tennis players stood about 10-20m away from me? Can I use this zoom for portraits too? I am a beginner with a Nikon D5100. So far my photos have been ok but I really would like to try sport phtography and am not sure what zoom to buy. Would appreciate any help you can provide. thanks Rebecca
Click to expand...


In order...
Yes.
Fast enough for pretty much anything (including planes heading straight at you.)
3-4 stops in the real world.
No.
Yes.
For some sports, you might want a faster maximum aperture (smaller number) so you can get a faster shutter speed to freeze the action but such lenses are much heavier and much more expensive.
 
thanks for your help:) sounds like it's ok then for the price
 
I personally went for the Tamron 70-300 VC, which is cheaper and quality is meant to be better at the long end (300mm) which is probably where you will be if taking sports photos from a distance.

The VR won't help much in capturing tennis action as it's the players and ball that is moving rather than the lens, instead you need to keep the shutter speed high (1/1000s).
 
JYC said:
I personally went for the Tamron 70-300 VC, which is cheaper and quality is meant to be better at the long end (300mm) which is probably where you will be if taking sports photos from a distance.

The VR won't help much in capturing tennis action as it's the players and ball that is moving rather than the lens, instead you need to keep the shutter speed high (1/1000s).
Click to expand...
:plus1:
 
I used mine for equestrian and found it fast and accurate on my D7000 and D600 with the ability to freeze action very well.
 
I had one of these a few years ago and eventually replaced it with a 70-200 f/2.8 tbh I got some decent results with it and for the price they go for especially used they are decent value for money, it's also a nice light weight alternative to the f/2.8 lenses.

I have also had the Tamron 70-300vc and while it s supposed to be sharper at the long end the Nikon version I never really found that to be the case maybe the Nikon I had was just a really good copy.

:) I think I have just talked myself into picking another one of these up :D will make a nice alternative to the 70-200 when I want to keep the weight I am carrying around down for day trips etc.
 
kendo1 said:
No problems with mine, used on a D200. I tend to use the 55-200 on my D5200.
Not the fastest at focusing but fast enough for me as I don't do sports photography.
It's okay for portraits if you stick to the lower focal lengths. VR works well for a couple of stops extra stabilisation.

I found the 55-200 a bit faster at focusing and a bit sharper overall, but not a lot in it.
Sample with 55-300

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kendunton/20245471228/in/dateposted-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kendunton/20407850806/in/dateposted-public/
Click to expand...

I'm speculating here that you're referring to the 55-300 DX lens rather than the 70-300 in the title? The 70-300 is a very quick for focussing.

Good video here demonstrating it.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3TcL0qYM2M


It's a really nice lens. The Tamron VC alternative is probably on a par too. You could make a case for opting for either and be very happy.
 
Oops. Just had to go and check.

I have the 70- 300, just typed 55 by mistake.

I'll stand by what I said though, not the fastest but fast enough for me.
 
kendo1 said:
Oops. Just had to go and check.

I have the 70- 300, just typed 55 by mistake.

I'll stand by what I said though, not the fastest but fast enough for me.
Click to expand...

Definitely not as quick as a 70-200 or long fast prime but I find it okay for motorsport and chasing the kids around. Not sure what it would be like with birds in flight though.
 
gad-westy said:
Definitely not as quick as a 70-200 or long fast prime but I find it okay for motorsport and chasing the kids around. Not sure what it would be like with birds in flight though.
Click to expand...

There's fast and very fast. I'm splitting hairs :)
Anyway. I like it!
 
I had issues with VR 'wobbling' at longer focus lengths on my 70-300mm. Sent it to Nikon, they sent it back 'no fault found'. My mother-in-law has the 55-300mm, I prefer that in use, even if it is DX and just barely poorer quality-wise (although the supplied hood is a piece of crap).
 
Last edited:
I had the 70-300mm VR and was impressed with it. AF was fast and accurate, and image quality was very good. As above though, VR won't help with tennis as shutter speed needs to be high anyway.

I don't profess to be a great photographer, but feel free to check these out. This album was exclusively shot with the 70-300mm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99443690@N04/albums/72157650465490632/with/16185071640/

And all but the first 6 of these (bear in mind it was a very dull day)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99443690@N04/albums/72157647431552633/with/15832760950/
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I had the 70-300mm VR and was impressed with it. AF was fast and accurate, and image quality was very good. As above though, VR won't help with tennis as shutter speed needs to be high anyway.

I don't profess to be a great photographer, but feel free to check these out. This album was exclusively shot with the 70-300mm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99443690@N04/albums/72157650465490632/with/16185071640/

And all but the first 6 of these (bear in mind it was a very dull day)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/99443690@N04/albums/72157647431552633/with/15832760950/
Click to expand...
 
There's another thread exactly the same in the beginners section. I'll just paste what I said there:

"My girlfriend wanted a 70-300 and after extensive research we found that the Tamron which is over £100 cheaper is near identical (many who had used both theNikon and Tamron argued that the Tamron was even better optically but others argued the Nikon JUST nicked it). If I was you I'd save the money as my girlfriend did, and get the Tamron which I've seen fantastic results from for a £239 lens."
 
JYC said:
I personally went for the Tamron 70-300 VC, which is cheaper and quality is meant to be better at the long end (300mm) which is probably where you will be if taking sports photos from a distance.

The VR won't help much in capturing tennis action as it's the players and ball that is moving rather than the lens, instead you need to keep the shutter speed high (1/1000s).
Click to expand...
:plus1:
 
htid said:
There's another thread exactly the same in the beginners section. I'll just paste what I said there:

"My girlfriend wanted a 70-300 and after extensive research we found that the Tamron which is over £100 cheaper is near identical (many who had used both theNikon and Tamron argued that the Tamron was even better optically but others argued the Nikon JUST nicked it). If I was you I'd save the money as my girlfriend did, and get the Tamron which I've seen fantastic results from for a £239 lens."
Click to expand...
I bought my 70-300 VR used and lost nothing when I sold it on, but if buying new I'd be tempted with the Tamron. My only concern would be Tamron's QC so I'd make sure I thoroughly checked it out when I got it and swap it if not happy with it.
 
HI, I've closed your other two threads and linked them to here :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top