Page 1 of 1

AF-S 70-300VR

PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:09 pm
by Onyx
Having read many favourable reviews of this lens since its release last year, I thought it's time I acquired one. It is intended to compliment my existing 80-200/2.8 as a lighter weight medium tele-zoom alternative. I can already foresee myself selling the 80-200 and acquiring fast primes within this range, if I ever needed a larger aperture than the 70-300VR affords. Such is the versatility of this lens, especially the technological marvels, ie. AF-S and VR functionalities more or less masks the inadequacies of its slow aperture in many instances. Live theatre/performances w/o flash is about the only scenario I can foresee this lens being unsuited to shooting.

The VR functionality I guess is the main drawcard for this lens, compared to half as expensive third party alternatives (Sigma and Tamron 70-300s). My cynicism of any forms of optical stabilisation being an alternative to proper shooting technique aside, I believe many will find VR a helpful feature in their photography.

Compared to other lenses - its closest sibling would no doubt be the previous generation 70-300G or ED, but I also think it has quite a bit in common with the 80-400VR. Both feature vibration reduction, both have the same variable aperture f/4.5-5.6, and in terms of focal range - the 70-300VR goes a bit wider but not as long, but is otherwise similar IMO. Auto focus would be faster featuring a silent wave motor instead of screw-driven via the body. An 80-200 or 70-200 f/2.8 'pro-grade' glass is obviously in a different league and aimed at a different niche to the target market for this lens. Although in terms of prices, the upgrade to the 80-200 isn't all that big of a leap - and anyone considering this lens should also consider the 80-200 IMO, esp if it's going to be your only medium tele-zoom lens.

Weight and build quality - the 70-300VR features 'plastic fantastic' build and is light weight, but it's only about an inch shorter retracted than my 80-200 push-pull. When zoomed out to 300mm, it grows about 2 inches longer. The build quality is surprisingly good IMO. Zoom and focus rings glides smoothly and there's no traces of zoom creep.

Comes with a faux-suede cloth pouch. Not as good as the hard cases of Nikon's pro grade glass in terms of physical protection in storage, but I guess it's better than nothing (or until you can afford a third party alternative).

The HB-36 hood fits my existing 18-70. Physically fits that is, impractical in use, as it vignettes severely below 35mm. Hilariously, the length of the hood is the same as the 18-70 lens.

Images - meh, I'll wait until the next model shoot I attend. Nobody wants to see shots of my backyard... ;)

Re: AF-S 70-300VR

PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:28 pm
by rooboy
Onyx wrote:Images - meh, I'll wait until the next model shoot I attend. Nobody wants to see shots of my backyard... ;)


Surely you could go find a duck to shoot :lol:

Good review, and I look forward to the samples. I'd be interested to know the lowest shutter speed for hand holding you can get away with. I imagine it would be a tough choice between an 80-200 & 70-300 if starting from scratch :wink:

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:04 pm
by Vodka
Onyx, thanks for the detailed review. As someone who's contemplating the upgrade from 70-300G to 70-300VR, this extra info has certainly helped.

Thinking out loud here...

Pros:
- VR
- silent wave motor (big plus in my books)

Cons:
- lower max aperture (f/4 vs f/4.5)
- cost (compared to the G anyway)
- extra weight

I'm pretty happy with the images I've been taking with the G (where lighting permits), but I can't help but wonder if VR/SWM will allow me to use a lens of this range more often (and maybe increase the number of "keep" images). Decisions, decisions!

Ben

PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:05 pm
by Onyx
Shooting the Mid-Summer's Night Dream at the Haven, I got the opportunity to use both the 70-300VR and 80-200 side by side.

I would have thought optical quality would be a landslide win to the f/2.8 'pro grade' glass... but no. Both lenses were used interchangeably and without referring to EXIF data, I'm not able to immediately pick which images came from which lens.

I was impressed with the 70-300VR. What I thought would be the 1 main disadvantage of the 70-300 lens (ie. slow aperture, prohibitive for low light use) has made me rethink. The 70-300 resists flaring better than the 80-200 - which was a huge surprise for me. Since both were used on the edge of available light threshold (ISO3200, wide open aperture and 1/30-1/80s shutter speeds), subject movement equally applicable to both, the addition of VR somewhat helped with keepers.

The extra ~1.5 stops or so gained with the 80-200 (f/2.8 vs f/4.5-5.6) was pretty much wiped out in application. It didn't afford nearly enough shutter speed for me to adequately freeze motion. In other words, I don't really miss the aperture.

Pics will come shortly...

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:48 pm
by DiZZ
Are you still planning to post some comparision photos?

I'm really tempted to get one of these myself.
From what I've read its a great performer and quite a bargin, even at AU RRP. ($850)

For those that haven't seen it, heres SLRGears review:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showprod ... roduct=992

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:30 pm
by Onyx
70-300VR
Image
100% crop: 300mm, f/8, 1/320s, ISO180.

Image
195mm, f/5.3(wide open), 1/30s, ISO1600.


80-200
Image
135mm, f/3.5, 1/30s, Hi-1 (ISO3200)


I've been meaning to do alot of things - amongst them processing the pics I've taken since end of Jan...

I'm keen to test it out for portraiture, originally my intention of making the purchase - but I've been swamped with work and obligations of money spending in my other hobbies that I haven't attended a model shoot yet (or be online much too).

I love this lens. It has made redundant my lustings for the 70-200VR. For one, I know I could live without the faster aperture; and the AF-S and VR takes it closer than my 80-200 does. Image quality is phenomenal. Not just for the price - but outright IMO.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:46 am
by DiZZ
Hmm, can I hold out for my tax return... that is the question. :)

PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:49 am
by jberth1
Yep - I'm amazed by mine. The sweet spot is definately between 70-200 - the reach to 300 is just a bonus when needed. The VR is sensational at removing higher frequency movement such as hand shake, and the AF-S focusing is something a 70-300 ED user could only dream about.....

Be prepared by higher battery usage though due to all those little motors buzzing around inside it.

Should I mention they're only US$479 at B&H at the moment... ?

Cheers

Justin

PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:58 pm
by Dargan
Onyx you mentioned commonality with the 80-400VR. Any more thoughts on this. I guess the glass quality is much better with the 80-400?