70-300mm lens decisions

[timatah]

Hi,
Ok, i've decided on the length of lens i want, but now the choices...
I have a D90, 18-105, 50mm 1.8, 8mm and would like something longer.

I've looked at
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG MACRO
Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro
NIKON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G Zoom Lens F4-5.6

Are any of these worthy? I'm trying to stay under $500 but if i am willing to save longer if these lenses wont cut it.

Any suggestions?

[Xebadir]

I find the Nikon 70-300 to be a really good lens, pretty good performer in my book, definitely need to get the VR model, and usually you can find one around $500.

Haven't tried the other two, and havent heard anything about them either.

If you were willing to wait a bit it might be worthwhile have a look at the new 55-300 VR which has just come out for DX cameras...Its got a nice focal length coverage and could be right up your alley in terms of price. An advantage of the 70-300 is it is a tried and faithful performer, and is usable on full frame if you need it....but at the same time this new lens could be the ducks nuts.

In terms of your budget you are pretty much going to be limited to this sort of 4 or 4.5 to around 5.6 maximum aperture zoom, as to go any larger would cost a fair whack more.

[johnno02]

I have the Tamron one for my D40,I'm quite happy with it in terms of sharpness,however it doesn't always lock focus as quickly as I'd like.

When it locks it does it very quickly,but sometimes it hunts a bit.
Regards.
John

[timatah]

I had read that the Tamron hunts a bit. The macro side sounds great too. The price is good.
About half an hour ago i was ready to dive in and get that lens, but i figure i can't be too impatient.

The VR model in the 70-300 sounds good. Does it perform in the 200-300mm range?

[Xebadir]

Certainly does. Most of my telephoto shooting for wildlife and birds seems to spend its time above there, and the results speak for themselves.

For instance this was shot somewhere up in the mid 200s (would check for you but my PC is out of comission due to incident)
http://a.imageshack.us/img695/3012/swampharrier.jpg (http://img695.imageshack.us/i/swampharrier.jpg/)

As was this
http://a.imageshack.us/img337/4418/redwattlebird2.jpg (http://img337.imageshack.us/i/redwattlebird2.jpg/)

This
http://a.imageshack.us/img96/1371/jta5979web.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img534/714/crimsonrosella.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img97/8713/maroonmapleweb3.jpg

All of these shots were taken at zoom over 200 (correct me if I am wrong from EXIF data).

I used this lens soley for about 2 or 3 years, was fantastic, just limited in the short end of things because I didnt have another lens. Fixed that well and truly now. Definitely a great lens

[timatah]

Wow, it looks amazing (nice photos too, their great!) Thanks for your input. I guess I now have to hear about the Sigma. I have also seen the sigma with the OS which i assume is like VR.

[johnno02]

I agree,
Some great shots from the Nikon Lens
The Tamron Unfortunately is not VR,but still good value when money is in short supply.

John

[davidd]

If you go for Nikon make sure it is the 70-300 AFS VR lens, not the AF G version, which has been called Nikon's worst lens. It is really cheap (about $200) and not worth bothering with.

[timatah]

Ok, the G is no good. I'll stay away from that. The VR sounds cool It's hard to know whether to spend the money and get the better one, or try my luck with a cheaper version. I assume VR is a huge help when zooming 200-300.

Does anyone know the difference between the Sigma - DG, APO DG and the APO DG OS??

[Xebadir]

One of the site sponsors has one of these listed in about your ballpark, but please dont take this as pushing you towards it, more just an example that if you look hard enough you can probably find one for 400-500 or thereabouts. (Please note I am in no way affiliated with this item...I really like my 70-300 and you will have to pry it from my cold dead hands).
http://www.cameramarket.com.au/nikkor-70-300mm-vr/

[timatah]

One of the site sponsors has one of these listed in about your ballpark, but please dont take this as pushing you towards it, more just an example that if you look hard enough you can probably find one for 400-500 or thereabouts. (Please note I am in no way affiliated with this item...I really like my 70-300 and you will have to pry it from my cold dead hands).
http://www.cameramarket.com.au/nikkor-70-300mm-vr/

Hahaha, I don't mind if you are pushing me there. :) I'm a salesman.

What a great site! I'll have to bookmark it!

[N*A*M]

in that range, your can't go past the 70-300 VR. even if you don't use VR, the optical formula is fairly good and the focusing performance is adequate. i would go with the nikon lens before the other two listed. depending what you plan to shoot, also consider the sigma 50-500 and 150-500 options.