So on a wider aperture it wouldn't hunt so badly? But then doesn't that give you DOF issues?
Nikon 70-300VR Lens
(42 posts) (22 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
i wonder if they'll update it since they are updating the 55-200 to the 300. . .
Posted 2 years ago # -
aslightdelay said:
So on a wider aperture it wouldn't hunt so badly? But then doesn't that give you DOF issues?No because autofocus happens before the lens stops down. So,for example, if there were a 70-300mm constant f2.8 aperture lens then it would let in a lot more light because the lens is at f2.8 when focusing. When you take the picture the lens will close up to f5.6 or whatever. With the 70-300mm f4.5-f5.6 lens the max aperture at 300 is f5.6 even before you take the picture. An f2.8 lens at 300mm will have a brighter viewfinder then the 70-300. I hope that makes sense.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think I follow you. Bear with me a second. If I'm understanding right, it goes like this: If I have, say, a 1.8 lens set to 2.8, it's going to be wide open (1.8) while I autofocus, but will step down to 2.8 when the time comes to actually shoot?
Posted 2 years ago # -
aslightdelay said:
I think I follow you. Bear with me a second. If I'm understanding right, it goes like this: If I have, say, a 1.8 lens set to 2.8, it's going to be wide open (1.8) while I autofocus, but will step down to 2.8 when the time comes to actually shoot?That is correct
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks!
Posted 2 years ago # -
pabnj said:
I have actually started to notice the same thing for distant subjects, they seemed out of focus for some reason, and I know I have taken really nice shots far away. I sent it in last week to Nikon USA for a look, it also appears that my VR hunts a bit too. Curious as to what their finding are.Wondering what Nikon had to say about this!
Posted 2 years ago # -
speshalyst said:
Wondering what Nikon had to say about this!I just received my lens back this past Saturday, they updated the software in the lens, cleaned it, and recalibrate it. It seems to be working much better than it did before. Prior I hesitated to use it because it seemed I'd shoot more lousy shots (out of focus, or motion blur) than good ones. Now most of the pictures are in focus, free of the motion blur that I experienced in the past. Still need more time with it, but it seems far more reliable. The VR seems a bit better too which probably was the reason for the software update.
Posted 2 years ago # -
-
pabnj just curious, how do you update the software in a lens? ^^ I'd like to vote again and say the 70-300mm VR is fantastic! It was great again on my national park holiday in the States this month.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I did not update the software, Nikon updated it when I sent it in for service. I guess everything has software in it now.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Humm interesting must be for lens corrections only. I just thought a lens calibration would solve the problem although updating the software in a lens might be part of the calibration. I hear it is more common with third party lenses than with Nikon or Canon..
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm curious about this, too. There's another thread that brings this up (in comparison to the 70-300) and has some diagrams that I can't make head or tail of.
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=2425Thoughts?
Posted 2 years ago # -
monty11 said:
How does the 70-300 compare to the current 55-200 in terms of IQ? What I'm after is whether it is worth the upgrade (apart from the extra 100mm).I do not own the 55-200mm lens so I really can't comment accurately on that. Many say including Thom Hogan that the 70-300mm is not a 300mm lens because of the performance drop at 300mm, but I have always been pleased with the results at 300mm keeping in mind what I paid for it. Personally my belief is that the 100mm is worth the difference in price, but that is just me.
Posted 2 years ago # -
monty11 said:
How does the 70-300 compare to the current 55-200 in terms of IQ? What I'm after is whether it is worth the upgrade (apart from the extra 100mm).As a current owner of both I find the IQ of the two lenses to be quite similar on DX. The 55-200 (VR) objectively vignettes more on DX than the 70-300, BUT the vignetting is not very objectionable, or even noticeable. I say this because the 55-200 does not have a hard transition from corner to center, but rather a very gentle one - one which is hard to see if you are not looking for it.
I very much like the fact that the 55-200 has a 52mm filter thread, and even though I feel the 70-300 VR is sharper at focal lengths > 150 I still rarely use it. In a nutshell, the IQ is very similar throughout most the focal range, and the main advantage of the 70-300, IMHO, is everything BUT basic IQ.
The 70-300 is also a better handling, more rugged, and heavier lens. I tend to use it almost exclusively on my FF and film bodies, as I don't find myself ever missing MF override on the 55-200. (Filter ring not rotating is nice, though not enough IMHO to justify carrying twice as many filters and more bulk.)
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
