Help researching my 2nd lens

[yael]

Thank you for your help finding a good walk around with close up lens.

Now, I'm looking for a telephoto lens. I won't be using it all the time, but for portraits, wildlife (have some wildlife refuge in my area) it would be great to have one.

On my Pentax, I have the Pentax DA 55-300 which I like. In the Nikon world, Nikon has both 55-300 VR and 70-300 VR. Which one is to choose?

Looking at the price, the 70-300 VR is more expensive which should mean it's better.

Also, VR seems important to me since I have shaky hands. And for the price, I don't want to go any higher than lets say $600.

If you have any other lens to propose, feel free to do so. I'm open to other brands even though I seem to be more and more impress with Nikon glass looking at your guys pictures!

Thanks,
Yael

 

[cybercops]

How about Tamron 70-300 VC. There is a thread here about this lens, and it is very sharp. Some claims it performs better than the 70-300VR counterpart (which is know to be hit-or-miss with sharpness problem).

 

[cybercops]

The thread I mentioned above is https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=289253&highlight=tamron+70-300

 

[mysh]

I have asctually heard good things about both but have never owned either. Don't think you can go wrong.
The 70-300 is built for FX so if you ever switch it can switch with you. The 55-300 is DX and is a big part of the reason for the price difference.
Adorama has the 70-300 refurb for 440 and the 55-300 new for 360. A few weeks ago you could get the 70-300 for 350 refurb. Shame you didnt do this a month ago

 

[yael]

Thanks for the info!
That Tamron looks great! It's $100 cheaper on Amazon than the Nikon but still $100 more than the Nikon 55-300.

Is the 55-300 something to 'avoid' if possible? I mean, do you get way better result with the Tamy or the N 70-300?

For right now, I don't have a Nikon yet... need more money... anyone for a donation?:wink:

 

[cybercops]

The Nikon 55-300 thread is here https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=282205&highlight=55-300&page=5

The only obvious advantage (after reading this thread) for the 70-300 is FX compatible

 

[yael]

OK, I don't think I'll go FX, photography is a hobby and I need to find the money to get a D90 already, so forget about a FX DSLR.

So my choice are between the 55-300 or the Tamy... I'll have to keep that in mind. I guess it will depend on the money I have left, even though the Tamy looks great... but that will make me with a Nikon DSLR and 1 sigma + 1 Tamy and no Nikon lens. Is that a weird setup?

 

[jpfigueiredo]

OK, I don't think I'll go FX, photography is a hobby and I need to find the money to get a D90 already, so forget about a FX DSLR.

So my choice are between the 55-300 or the Tamy... I'll have to keep that in mind. I guess it will depend on the money I have left, even though the Tamy looks great... but that will make me with a Nikon DSLR and 1 sigma + 1 Tamy and no Nikon lens. Is that a weird setup?

Haha. There are no weird setups, don't worry. It's always a personal thing :wink:


When deciding between those two lens you mention, maybe you should also consider size and weight as choosing factors?

I don't know exact numbers, but the Tamron (which is full-frame) should be a lot bigger and weight more than the 55-300... Maybe you should try holding both in your hands before deciding.

Another alternative is going the super-cheap way, and finding a 2nd-hand 55-200 VR (I'd say for $100). It could also help you decide before making the big investment latter.

 

[yael]

My big problem is I live in the middle of no where so there is no store to go to try the lens. So I would be more than happy to receive help when I'll get closer of buying the system.

It would be nice too to have similar thread on my 2 lens (sigma 17-70 + one of the discuss lens) to be able to share filter like CPL or ND.

I'm not that interested in a 200mm, I do need a bigger range. Even going beyond 300mm would be nice but that's out of my budget.

 

[gvg45]

OK, I don't think I'll go FX, photography is a hobby

LOL, that's how a lot of us got started. :biggrin:

and I need to find the money to get a D90 already, so forget about a FX DSLR.

See what I mean...:tongue: 2 camera's for a hobby? I see FX in your near future.:wink:

 

[yael]

Hey Greg, donation are always welcome! :wink:

Also with all my lens, I need to give room to a prime like the 50mm f1.8, so I might just go with the 55-300 from Nikon et give me that extra cash for the 50mm.

 

[les_au]

Hey Greg, donation are always welcome! :wink:

Also with all my lens, I need to give room to a prime like the 50mm f1.8, so I might just go with the 55-300 from Nikon et give me that extra cash for the 50mm.

put your hat out on the street and start asking the public for donations, you would prolly get more cash that way than a bunch of gear junkies here lol. as for primes have a look at a 35mm f/1.8, awsome lens for the money, and hobby is just a cute word for addiction

 

[yael]

lol

I though of going with primes only, but a zoom is so nice to have!
I have a 28, 50 and 85 on my Pentax and I use them all depending of what I'm shooting. So later on, I will go a buy more primes. But for switching brands, I never to go a slow or cheap which ever one that fits!

 

[Chayelle]

Yael...
the 50 f1.8 is a great little lens...
I love this lens on DX...
And the Nikon 70-300vr is also a wonderful, all-around lens.
For a great investment, probably around $900-950...
the 300 f4 afs lens is a wonderful piece of glass for birds, wildlife,
macro or closeup...
There is no VR on this lens, but it is such a fantastic lens....sharp
lovely shots.

 

[sambo.]

i'd suggest save up a little longer and get the 70-300VR.

 

[yael]

Yes, but that lens is heavier so that's on the bad side. On the good side, it works with FX as well which I don't really care.

Is the quality any different between the 55-300 and the 70-300? I mean a real difference?

I don't shoot that much at that range, so I don't want to spend extra.

 

[Rolf]

i'd suggest save up a little longer and get the 70-300VR.

Great advice. This is a wonderful lens.
Good Luck!
Rolf

 

[vindex1963]

I LOVE my 70-300mm. I find it amazing me time after time.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[BourbonCowboy]

I'm gonna throw my two unsolicited cents into the discussion.

The 55-200 is a nice lens for vacation because it's light and compact. I've had a couple, but sold them after a while. The 70-300VR is a great lens because it focuses faster, produces more saturation, is built much better, and offers more reach. Get the the 70-300.

 

[yael]

so you are thinking that optically (color, contrast...), the 70-300 is better than the 55-300 (I'm not talking about the 55-200)?
Then how about the Tamron 70-300 vs Nikon 70-300 with the same question?