70-300 Vr

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by bmiller, Jul 27, 2007.

  1. The 70-300 VR is a pretty decent price. Has anyone seen any difference between it and the older D version. Outside of the VR i don't expect there to be much difference. The 70-300 VR seems like a good, small traveling lens for my trip to China . I might sell the 70-300 D and pick up a 70-300 VR. I'd hate to miss those perfect shots because i didn't have a VR.
    Brad
     
  2. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    The 70-300 VR is way better than the older 70-300 IMHO
    I sold my 70-300. It is a great starter lens.
    Quality of the New VR is real good
     
  3. ultimind

    ultimind

    990
    May 13, 2007
    Cleveland, OH
    Has anyone tossed the 70-300VR on a 35mm body and seen how it performs? Given that some of these lenses are FF compatible, it would be interesting to see edge performance on some decent film stock.
     
  4. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    the VR smokes the old non VR...no contest!
     
  5. Joyseeker

    Joyseeker Guest

    in shop test on 70-300vr

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  6. I have both, and I think the new VR lens has significantly better optics, in addition to VR.
     
  7. I should add that it is significantly larger and heavier than the older non-VR version. I don't think I'll be carrying it on trips involving air travel.
     
  8. nykonian

    nykonian

    570
    May 4, 2007
    New York
    55-200VR is much smaller and it's just as good optically if you don't intend to use 200-300mm.
     
  9. Joyseeker

    Joyseeker Guest

    any pics?
     
  10. Here are two images; one from each lens both shot at 300mm:

    70-300mm f 4.0-5.6 ED

    [​IMG]

    70-300mm f 4.5-5.6 G IF ED VR

    80219438.

    VR is sharper but IMHO you could still get very nice images with the older version. VR version also focuses much faster.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 27, 2007
  11. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    I am interested in the 70-300 VR as well
    selling off my 18-200, and don't want to lug the 80-200 all the time
    either that or buying a kenko 1.4 TC
    not sure which way to go
    seems most people get the 70-300 for birds
    and I don't really do birds..

    Brian, thought you were selling the beast ??..lol
     
  12. nykonian

    nykonian

    570
    May 4, 2007
    New York
    Frank, I sold it. And yes, I miss it already.
     
  13. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    the 17-55 doesn't thrill you or ???
    you sold the 85 1.8 also...
     
  14. My 70-300VR would NEVER be left at home, no matter where I went!! The 200-300 makes a big difference!


    Cheers
    Nancy
     
  15. iaukrust

    iaukrust

    21
    Jan 20, 2006
    Norway
    Since I own the 70-300 ED (not the G-version) myself and have wondered about the new VR-lens, I'm curious about which 70-300 you compared it with? I've read somewhere that the ED-version performs better optically than the G-version, but if I understand correctly the new VR-lens are better than both?
     
  16. The 70-300VR is ED AND of course VR, the best of both worlds. Examples below:smile:. It is the best deal going IMHO.

    [​IMG]

    On a recent trip to Alaska, if I did not have the VR I would NOT have gotten this shot. We were in a raft moving down the river.

    [​IMG]

    But also good for landscapes
    [​IMG]

    Nancy
     
  17. Inge

    I was comparing the new VR version to the earlier ED version. The two images show this comparison. I agree with what you have heard.
     
  18. I never had a problem with the D version. But, I like the VR version more because of the VR. I've been very happy with the photos from both versions.
     
  19. I took that lens and several others on a recent trip to Kauai. Everything fit in my backpack. The only things in my kit that I didn't take were the 24mm f2.8D, 35-70mm f2.8D, 80-200mm f2.8D and 300mm f4. Didn't even wish I had taken any of them.
     
  20. bender73

    bender73 Guest

    i sold my 80-200 for the 70-300 VR (after first owning a 70-300 VR and selling it for the 80-200). i love the 70-300 VR, i mean, i love this lens. i get awesome shots with it. it focuses lightning fast (at least with the D200), is very sharp, and has VR. it's light. built well. all for a decent price. i think it's one of nikon's gems and should be a very popular lens.

    i just ordered a 24-120 VR for casual shooting and i hope i am just as impressed. that lens has mixed reviews.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR - First Impressions Lens Lust Dec 10, 2017
Nikon 200-500mm VR question Lens Lust Dec 5, 2017
Sports Lens: 200-500 f/5.6 or 300/2.8 VR I Lens Lust Dec 4, 2017
AF-S 300/4D vs 80-400 VR II Lens Lust Nov 29, 2017
A (VERY) Non Tech Background Comparison of the 200-500 VR Lens Lust Nov 5, 2017