Nikon 70-300 VR Successor?

willioywillioy Posts: 3Member
edited November 2013 in Nikon Lenses
Hello guys, I come here and read the articles frequently but I only just signed up an acount so I guess I'm new here!

I'm thinking to get the Nikon 70-300 VR as a christmas present for myself.
But when I was looking at its specifications I realised it came out in 2006, thats 7 years ago now.
So I'm just wondering if there's a new lens coming out soon from Nikon to replace this highly rated lens?
I've been searching around but cannot find any news about a new lens but I don't want to get one now and see a better one come out a month after.

Thanks!

Comments

  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    What body? The much newer AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR might be a choice as well if you are on cropped sensor. And, how much money do you want to spend? My guess is, if Nikon revises the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED and puts in VRIII, the lens will go up in price substantially. And, as this is a full format lens, it will generally be more money than a crop sensor lens.
    Msmoto, mod
  • willioywillioy Posts: 3Member
    I have a D5000 with the 18-55, 10-24 and 50 1.8.
    I hear the 18-300 doesn't have the best distortion control since it covers such a wide range?

    I'm considering 70-300 cause I take photos of animals quite often, and it seems 70-300 has an advantage as it has fast focus compare to 55-300?
    And yeh I can see your point, the price for the 70-300 at the moment is probably the maximum I'm willing to spend. and obviously if there's a new lens it would be more expensive than the current one.
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    I don't see an update soon, and agree with Msmoto, an update would probably put it much higher - probably in the $500-$700 range since it is FX. Can't really beat the price of the 70-300vr now. Great lens for sure. If I recall, the 55-300vr didn't test that far behind it nor did the 18-300 on the tele end. Super zooms always suffer from distortion on the wide end, but you have the 10-24 to compensate that.
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    The present 70-300VR lens is about the best telephoto i have ever used for the price. The 55-300 is NOT as good as the 70-300VR. The 55-300 is darn good for what I paid for it. But the 70-300VR is currently one of Nikon's best values. Why in the world would they introduce a new one??? I own three 70-300 Nikkors. The close up characteristics of the 55-300 do beat the 70-300VR.
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    Also the 70-300VR all work on the FX cameras. On D7100 to Nikon F5's I prefer that lens. The new 80-400VR Nikkor is though GREATLY overpriced!
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,029Moderator
    On the 70-300 VR, great lens, great price, but be aware your sharpest images will be at 240mm and below. It is a little soft between 240 and 300.
    Always learning.
  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    Anybody compared this one first hand to the similar Tamron?
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    edited December 2013
    When I shoot with the 70-300VR I purposely try to stay below 240mm. On the other hand do not be certain that images of considerable value can't be taken on the 300mm setting! Also the D7100 has a crop mode. I ALSO avoid using that unless I need it. Too bad the 80-400VR is so expensive. I would already own one if they were more reasonable. My tactic now is use the 70-300VR and get closer if possible. Problem is some stuff I photograph is wild and spooky. Also some subjects vastly can either disappear or worse charge.

    Moose and Brown Bears in my personal experience are not very tolerant of "close up" photographers. On the other hand actually being out there is to me way better than very long, heavy, and expensive glass. In Brown Bear and moose photography I have had situations where it started out as a 300mm shot and then swiftly a 40mm would have been better. Some of my favorite images in fact were taken with the 12-24mm DX and usually on the wide end. BY that stage you are in the trample or attack zone. Then I take the shots and move off. I also try to avoid such close encounters. If I lived in those regions and did that kind of work more often i would predict that an accident was on the way top happy. All in all the 70-300VR is a great lens and putting gold badges on it bears very little attraction to me. I have tried and OWNED most of the Sigma and Tamrons. They were a very sad and brief ownership. Tokina wide angle though are very highly rated and I have used them enough to know they are pretty decent but this is a 70-300VR Nikkor thread.
    Post edited by DaveyJ on
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    edited December 2013
    I was looking at this range a short while ago and the best lens in terms of IQ reviews is the "Tamron SP AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD Model A005". One of my primary reasons to get one was to use it with the Nikon1 system, but I discovered that there were issues with the FT1 adapter + Tamrons at that time so I have held off. If I did not have the Nikon1 system in my kit. Ie only DX and/or FX the Tamron would be my choice over the nikon 70-300. having said that, I think there was one review that did give the Tamron worse scores .. so you will need to try it out for yourself or maybe someone here may be able to speak up.

    I will probably get the 18-300 instead of either of the 70-300s as the nikon1 only uses the centre of the lens and that 18-300 centre scores are pretty good.
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • ChasCSChasCS Posts: 309Member
    edited December 2013
    DaveyJ said: "Too bad the 80-400mm is so expensive..."

    I whole heartedly agree!! It pains me greatly, but we're tough!

    That's why I'm Smiling and Saving...
    It took Nikon eight years to update this lens, it will not take me that long to save for mine... :-)

    Post edited by ChasCS on
    D800, AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR, B+W Clear MRC 77mm, AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR, Sigma DG UV 77mm,
    SB-910~WG-AS3, SB-50, ME-1, Lexar Professional 600x 64GB SDXC UHS-I 90MB/s* x2, 400x 32GB SDHC UHS-I 60MB/s* x1
    Vanguard ALTA PRO 263AT, GH-300T, SBH-250, SBH-100, PH-22 Panhead
    Lowepro S&F Deluxe Technical Belt and Harness ~ Pouch 60 AW 50 AW & 10, S&F Toploader 70 AW, Lens Case 11 x 26cm
    FE, NIKKOR 2-20mm f/1.8, OPTEX UV 52mm, Vivitar Zoom 285, Kodacolor VR 1000 CF 135-24 EXP DX 35mm, rePlay XD1080

  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    One thing to note on Tamron's VC, it takes a second to "rev up" for it to work. Nikon's kicks in faster.
    Other than that I have not tried the Tramron. Generally speaking, out of the 3rd party lens makers, only their pro line is good, their consumer lines suffer greatly in my experience.

    One thing everyone should take into consideration with reading reviews on consumer lenses, you never know who (or their understanding of photography) is writing the review. Just be cautious - rarely do pros review consumer models so when there is a glowing one, you may just get a person who has never used all of the other lenses out there who is just happy to save a few hundred $$.

    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
  • NukeNuke Posts: 64Member
    The 70-300 is an "almost" Nikon gold band lens. It preforms pretty close to what some of the gold band lenses do. A Nikon mistake? I don't know? It's missing the nano coating stuff but for the price, I'd buy it again, in a heart beat. If Nikon slaps a gold band on an updated version, you can depend on the price going up, up.
  • willioywillioy Posts: 3Member
    Thanks for everyones comments and helps, really appreciated.
    I understand while 70-300 is not a perfect lens, going soft over 240 or 250mm, it is a "bargain" in terms of its price right now. So I just went and bought myself one, should be here within a week, cant wait!
  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    @TTJ: I'm not sure I understand. You write in part:
    "One thing to note on Tamron's VC, it takes a second to "rev up" for it to work. Nikon's kicks in faster."

    Photozone seems to claim it's the other way 'round, unless I'm missing something. PZ writes:

    "The Tamron lens offers a VC ("Vibration Control") which is comparable to Nikon's VR. When looking through the viewfinder with this lens attached, the image is a lot more stable than with a Nikon VR lens. However, this is not due to much better efficiency of the VC system, it simply works in a different manner. Nikon VR has two stages: as soon as the viewfinder is half pressed VR starts to work with reduced movements to stabilize the viewfinder image. When the shutter is released, the system enables full stabilization movement for the actual exposure.

    VC in the other hand seems to be in "full throttle" mode all the time. This results in a rock solid viewfinder image. Sounds good at first, but can become somewhat annoying when trying to slightly adjust composition: VC quite often compensates the intended movements."

    The way I read PZ, their version of VR ("VC") is somehow always-on?
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    edited December 2013
    @williloy: Let us know how YOU do with the 70-300VR lens. I have never heard of a bad one but DO CHECK within your 30 day no questions return date to make sure focus and all that is OK! Sure wish I was at that stage with the 80-400VR lens, but it is VERY expensive compared to the 70-300VR. Because the 70-300VR works so well on FX.
    Usually it is on my D7100 but right now it is on my D3200.
    Post edited by DaveyJ on
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    edited December 2013
    @TTJ: I'm not sure I understand. You write in part:
    "One thing to note on Tamron's VC, it takes a second to "rev up" for it to work. Nikon's kicks in faster."

    Photozone seems to claim it's the other way 'round, unless I'm missing something. PZ writes: ...

    The way I read PZ, their version of VR ("VC") is somehow always-on?
    I don't read it that way at all. And actually don't see them making any claim of anything but to point out VC just works differently than VR. VC - you do feel it rev up - especially early versions. VR you really don't. I'm not sure if they have Nikon's VR described 100% correctly as well. The VC is on with the trigger button 1/2 pushed, not all the time. I don't care what It looks like in the viewfinder, I'm taking photos not sightseeing with a pair of binoculars.(; Kind of an odd write-up of it by PZ.

    This is from my experience. I had the 17-50vc and used a friends 28-300vc to see if that would be just a good knock around lens on the cheap for about a month. I played with the 24-70vc quite a bit as well (Nice lens btw). Every Tamron took a bit more to fully stabilize from shot to shot. It may start faster(?) or look better in the viewfinder, but to "work" it was slower than Nikon's VR. I also experienced Nikon's VR worked better as well. If you don't have the funds for the Nikon gear, Tamron is better than Sigma (non-art) in my opinion. The 17-50vc and 24-70vc are really good lenses with much better prices than NIkon.
    Post edited by TaoTeJared on
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
Sign In or Register to comment.