Nikon DSLR users
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] Nikon DSLR users

7 Posts
7 Users
0 Reactions
60 Views
 wors
Posts: 3795
Free Member
Topic starter
 

55 - 300 VR zoom lens, what are your opinions on this?

ta


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 2:05 pm
 wors
Posts: 3795
Free Member
Topic starter
 

anyone?


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 6:49 pm
Posts: 2425
Free Member
 

Got 18 - 200 which is aI fantastic walkabout lens
No idea about the 55 - 300
Would imagine 300 is near tripod territory on a digital


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 7:10 pm
Posts: 53
Free Member
 

kenrockwell
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-300mm.htm


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 7:12 pm
Posts: 122
Free Member
 

Used to own a 55- 300 F 2.8, main problem I had was the focus distance
was about 15 feet in front. The VR may be different.

In the end I sold it as it was in the bag most of the time.

Used a lot of battery also.


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 8:36 pm
 ski
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I tested both the Nikon 55-300vr & 70-300vr for my D90

Image quality wise I could not split them at their 70mm-250mm setting, but the 70-300mm had the edge over 250mm, but both I was more than happy with the image quality tbh.

The 70-300mm was snapier focusing, on my D90.

But the 55-300mm is noticably lighter, which might make a difference if you are carying quite a bit of kit.

I am not sure that's enough to justify the extra you have to fork out for the 70-300mm.

The biggie for me, well when I get one, is it will work with a full frame, if I was sticking with the D90, I would be more than happy going for the 55-300mm 😉


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 8:57 pm
Posts: 17728
Full Member
 

I haven't used the 55-300mm VR, but have own the 70-300VR, which is a nice lens.

Looking at that Ken Rockwell review, he reckons the 70-300VR focuses faster. I sometimes find that mine hunts about a bit in low light, so am not sure I would want anything that is slower than the 70-300VR.

But looking online, the 55-300 seems to be about £200 cheaper, which is a significant saving. KR rates the optical qualities of the lens as good.

VR definitely makes the lens usable at the long end in most conditions. Of course, poor light can make you struggle a bit but not a great deal you can do about that.


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 9:02 pm
Posts: 1299
Free Member
 

Depends what you want to do with it. For what it is, it's a good lens.

It's fairly cheap, and it's light if your lugging it around. Compared to the 70-300 it's not as quick on AF and it's less usable at the longer end, and it's DX format so if you want/have a full frame camera it's not going to work out.

I've used both and while I preferred the 70-300 it's heavier if you're lugging it around which might be important. Try the 55-300, if you get on with it but at some point feel that you want something better they hold value pretty well. I bought the 70-300 over the 55-300 in the end but mainly because I picked it up for £299 brand new in an Argos clearance!


 
Posted : 08/12/2011 10:38 pm

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!