answers: 70

  1. Anton
    05.07.2016

    The lens is just a bomb! I bought it on ebay in Japan for 6500 Russian rubles. It shoots at all focal points remarkably, colors are bright, saturated. The sharpness is good. Because it doesn’t bother with dark, I still cover the diaphragm often up to 4. The only inconvenience is that you can’t wear the camera down with the lens, the pipe leaves under its own weight. Spark with the D70s gives me very high quality photos.

    Reply

  2. Simon
    17.09.2016

    That’s the thread, tell me or I don’t believe my eyes ... The pictures on the test are worse than those on the Kit's lens ... And neither do they compare Nikkor 70-210 / 4 or 80-200 / 2.8

    Reply

    • Lynx
      17.09.2016

      don't believe

      Reply

    • Denis
      09.03.2022

      No, no, don't believe me, of course.

      Reply

  3. Kamil
    24.07.2017

    I am torn between this lens and the A17NII 70-300 tamron.
    Tamron is more needed because of the motor - you can put it on the D3000, but otherwise it seems to be losing in everything.
    Or not in everything? A lot of weight here is rather a minus.

    Reply

    • Denis
      04.03.2022

      On Nikon Tamron? What's the point then in Nikon himself? Nikon needs Nikon. For Canon ... Then do it yourself.

      Reply

  4. Vladimir
    23.02.2018

    Arkady, good day! Which lens is preferred on the FF: F Nikkor 75-300 mm 1: 4.5-5.6 or Tamron LD DI AF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 Tele-Macro (1: 2) A17? First of all, sharpness is of interest. Thanks!

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      23.02.2018

      Tamron will be better. As I understand it, the price of the issue is important. Tamron A17 is also sold under the Promaster brand, usually 30% cheaper.

      Reply

      • Vladimir
        05.03.2018

        Arkady, thanks for the answer! What matters is not price, but sharpness and focus speed.

        Reply

    • Stas
      13.10.2018

      Good afternoon! These lenses have a DIFFERENT purpose, Tamron - macro, and can focus from a very small distance, Nikkor only from one and a half meters. Your choice depends on your tasks!

      Reply

      • B. R. P.
        23.02.2020

        The above Tamron is not a macro lens. It has a macro mode that works from 180 to 300 mm focal length, where the sharpness of this lens is quite deplorable. In this mode, the aiming distance is from 0,95 m, so there are no “very small distances”.

        Reply

  5. Andrei
    10.02.2019

    Good evening. The description is fully consistent with reality, a solid metal-glass construct, a subjectively convenient zoom mechanism (trombone), is very similar to Sigma AF 75-200 / 3.8, but Nikkor’s focus is just lightning fast for a screwdriver. In order to make sure of this, you will need a top carcass. Tested on film F5, as well as the numbers D2xs and D3. On the Fujifilm S2 / S3 Pro, based on the not-so-fast N / F80, focusing is usual for a screwdriver: slow, noisy, yawing. Also, on my copy, a strange feature was noted: infinity is achieved only in the range of 200-300mm, from 75 to 200 infinity within 10-15 meters. Who will tell me, is this a defect in a particular instance, or a feature of this model?

    Reply

  6. Makunochimaster
    08.08.2019

    Who knows how long the lens is from the lens mount to the front lens?

    Reply

    • Makunochimaster
      09.08.2019

      already found on the site of Ken Rockwell

      Reply

  7. Makunochimaster
    11.08.2019

    I got a terrible copy, soap soap, I had to take AF 70-300 ED

    Reply

    • Denis
      09.03.2022

      Eh, damn!

      Reply

  8. Eugene
    14.10.2019

    Tell me, in different places they write different things, but is it still an FX or DX lens?

    Reply

    • Dmitry
      14.10.2019

      FX, of course, is a film lens, then the concept of dx itself did not exist.

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      15.10.2019

      If the lens is not marked DX or Nikon 1, or IX, then this is an FX lens for full-frame cameras.

      Reply

  9. Andrei
    21.11.2019

    And tell me, who had the opportunity to compare, who gives a sharper picture over the entire field of the frame (not only in the center) on covered apertures, a lens from a review or 70-210 * 4 (https://radojuva.com/2011/12/nikon-70-210-mm-f-4-af-review/)?
    With an eye on landscape work

    Reply

  10. Konstantin
    23.10.2021

    Such a plan was bought by Tokin's AF75-300 4.5-5.6 lens killed on olkh inexpensively 500 UAH. After 250mm, sometimes it focuses poorly in cloudy weather, insufficient lighting. At all focal lengths it is quite sharp at a fully open aperture. Here are test photos at the maximum open aperture of various focal lengths. Nikon7000 and Tokina.Google drive. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/136CxQN4Sqz-HwqCatCb_xvOF1agU_Grv?usp=sharing

    Reply

  11. Michael
    17.04.2023

    Hello! Tell me, please, how much in terms of zoom, in terms of magnification, is this lens suitable for catching birds, animals from long and not very distances? I am specifically interested in THIS model, but, I confess, I have absolutely no experience with larger focal lengths than 200 mm, therefore I do not quite adequately imagine what, how and from what distance I can see when advancing by 280-300 mm.

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      17.04.2023

      1,5 times closer than 200mm. 300 even on crop is not always enough for small and / or very distant objects. For pigeons, sparrows, tits, etc. back and forth, but hardly in National Geographic) Then, this particular lens is very slow and is unlikely to be suitable for highly moving live models.

      Reply

  12. Olga
    25.01.2024

    Please tell me which lens to choose, Nikon AF Nikkor 75-300mm 1: 4.5-5.6 or Telear-N 3.5/200mm?

    Reply

  13. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer