NikonGear'23

Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Peter Forsell on January 05, 2016, 00:55:53

Title: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Peter Forsell on January 05, 2016, 00:55:53
I'm looking for a dirt cheap, light and small tele zoom, that would still be usable. And I'd prefer AF.

Bjørn has rated the old 70-210 f4 pretty low. How about 70-300 D ED f4-5.6 ? This is not the bad G version nor the VR version. Any other suggestions?

Or maybe a manual focus lens would be better after all, something like 80-200 f4 ?
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Bjørn Rørslett on January 05, 2016, 01:08:03
The last incarnations of 70-300 with VR are pretty good. Not stellar, but does the job decently.

I never understood why some "experts" enthuse about the old 70-210/f4 AF. I have used several copies of it and all were uniformly mediocre.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Ron Scubadiver on January 05, 2016, 01:36:59
70-300 VR can be picked up really cheap used or refurbished.  I get great results from mine.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Mongo on January 05, 2016, 07:07:12
Peter, it may help us to know the zoom range you need in order to try and give relevant suggestions or if a combination of 2 inexpensive zooms will cover your range
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Airy on January 05, 2016, 08:19:16
70-300 VR can be picked up really cheap used or refurbished.  I get great results from mine.
+1 ; probably your best choice for a cheap telezoom ; quality is good to very good.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Frank Fremerey on January 05, 2016, 09:09:25
I did horses with the 70-300 VR on my D3 and got great results.

I had the 1.4/85 afs along side with it at the time and is is of course no match to the prime.

But it is decently fast and sharp and it is dirt cheap.

Another option is the older afs 2.8/80-200 ... used .... optically much better but no VR.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Peter Forsell on January 05, 2016, 11:42:50
70-300 VR can be picked up really cheap used or refurbished.  I get great results from mine.

+1 ; probably your best choice for a cheap telezoom ; quality is good to very good.

The last incarnations of 70-300 with VR are pretty good. Not stellar, but does the job decently.
I never understood why some "experts" enthuse about the old 70-210/f4 AF. I have used several copies of it and all were uniformly mediocre.

Okay thank you, the opinion seems to be unanimous towards the 70-300VR.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Peter Forsell on January 05, 2016, 11:54:41
Peter, it may help us to know the zoom range you need in order to try and give relevant suggestions or if a combination of 2 inexpensive zooms will cover your range

You are right, I should have been more specific. I am thinking very cheap but optically decent up to 200 mm or so.

I did horses with the 70-300 VR on my D3 and got great results.

I had the 1.4/85 afs along side with it at the time and is is of course no match to the prime.

But it is decently fast and sharp and it is dirt cheap.

Another option is the older afs 2.8/80-200 ... used .... optically much better but no VR.

Okay thanks Frank, the fourth vote for 70-300VR.

I have the other options you mention, but trying to find something smaller (pocketable), lighter and cheaper. I have 85/1.4D, 105/2.8, 200/2VRII, 70-200VR, 300VR, 400VR but those either won't reach 200mm or so, or aren't pocketable. I believe 80-200 AFS is heavier than 70-200VR.

Too bad there isn't an older but decent AF  80-200/4 or similar. There's the AIS version though, and AI 80-200/4.5 which received good rating from Bjørn, but manual focusing and my eyesight do not cooperate well.

I'll start looking for a 70-300VR locally, so I can test one before committing myself. Thanks everybody.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Frank Fremerey on January 05, 2016, 12:33:25
The 70-300VR is neither lightweight nor small. But I can go to 300 that is true.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Bjørn Rørslett on January 05, 2016, 12:39:08
The 70-300VR is neither lightweight nor small. But I can go to 300 that is true.

This is relative. I found the 70-300 eminently hand-holdable. The 300 mm focal length adds to the overall size of course, but not that much to the heft.

By the way, the 70-300 VR works with IR too. In case one wants to expand the photographic horizon :D
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Alaun on January 05, 2016, 13:21:29
From Nikon there is also the 28-300 VR. Slightly some more bucks. I use this lens on my D200 for IR, there it works just fine.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Bjørn Rørslett on January 05, 2016, 13:28:13
The 28-300 extends in an almost obscene manner towards 300 mm ... This zoom is very good for IR, also for general usage on a 'normal' camera. The VR functions pretty well too. However, the long end isn't its strongest feature in terms of quality.

I sometimes think the old 28-200 screwdriver-type AF would be a better candidate, if one can stands the whining noise it makes during AF.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Alaun on January 05, 2016, 13:34:26
... extends in an almost obscene manner towards 300 mm ...

Yes!
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Hugh_3170 on January 05, 2016, 14:01:12
The older 80-200mm f/2.8 lens with screw driver AF is pretty good and can be had fairly cheaply.  It is still available new.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Roland Vink on January 05, 2016, 20:34:02
Too bad there isn't an older but decent AF  80-200/4 or similar. There's the AIS version though, and AI 80-200/4.5 which received good rating from Bjørn, but manual focusing and my eyesight do not cooperate well.
The AIS 80-200/4 is a nicely made lens, and the close focusing to 1.2m is useful too, but it's not well corrected for CAs. The AI 80-200/4.5 may be a little better but you lose 2/3 stop and it only focuses to 1.8m.

If you only want up to 200mm, are happy with screw-drive AF and can live without VR, the AF-D 80-200/4.5-5.6 might be worth a look. It's extremely compact and lightweight, and dirt cheap. I've heard good things about the optics, but never tried it and don't know how well it performs on modern DSLRs.

Another option would be the AFS 55-200VR on a DX body...
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Kitanikkor on January 06, 2016, 20:58:43
To me, dirt cheap is <$100...my choice is the 75-300mm/4.5-5.6 Nikkor....shot on the D610

no VR though...can't have it all for dirt.


@ 75mm

(http://imageshack.com/a/img911/6162/Jx5YUm.jpg)

@ 150ish

(http://imageshack.com/a/img905/958/fD4g3M.jpg)

@300

(http://imageshack.com/a/img633/2961/07uPy4.jpg)
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Peter Forsell on January 07, 2016, 17:07:27
Thx. This lens is the 70-300 G without VR, right?
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Chip Chipowski on January 07, 2016, 17:21:13
I think Kitanikkor is referring to this older AF version: http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AF75300mm/index.htm (http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AF75300mm/index.htm)
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Kitanikkor on January 07, 2016, 17:49:51
Yes Chip...that's the one....now typically available for $75US.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Peter Forsell on January 07, 2016, 17:53:36
Oh yes, I was sloppy and didn't see it was 75-xxx. I'll look into that one thx.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: zuglufttier on January 07, 2016, 18:03:40
For a DX camera, there's always the 55-200VR. If you don't mind manual focus and a rather limited range, have a look at the 75-150/3.5 series E which is a very nice lens overall. Can be had for less then 50 euros here and there.
Title: Re: Dirt cheap tele zoom, advice please
Post by: Alex Cejka on January 07, 2016, 19:05:19
I just got 70-300VR in November for $280CAN with filter and in an excellent condition. I haven't had a chance to put trough good workout yet but plan to do some either later today or tomorrow.

Here is a shot using 28-300VR at 160mm:

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5745/22756479602_b6279a524d_b.jpg)

Got my 28-300 on someone's recommendation used for a decent price wanting to take it with me for a trip, but left it home. It is for sale now as I plan to stick with 70-300 for now.