Nikon 55-300mm VR

Just placed my order for one of these, I was looking round for some reviews for it but I guess it's a little early yet.

Has anyone else placed an order for one - What your opinion on this lens?

Cheers

Original File (Full size) = http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/128152106/original.jpg
Shot taken with D300, 280mm, handheld,
Andy

Very Clear Picture you have there.

Lens should be with me today.

Cheers

Lens arrived yesterday (Tuesday). Will try to give it a bash over the next few days & post some images up.

This lens doesn't seem too popular judging by the lack of replys.

Cheers

It was announced with 24-120 and 28-300, that are lenses with nothing similar before (well, there was the old 24-120, but it lost its appeal time ago...).

But this 55-300 arrives when there is the 55-200 and the 70-300, so it isn't a lens filling an empty gap and with a lot of demand right now.

I guess it will be quite popular (more if it performs as in the photo above, quite well!), but also that it will sell in a steady and quite way. Not the big boom expected for the 24-120 and 28-300.

Please, tell us about it and post some photos

Saludos!

--
Please, excuse my poor english...

home44 said:

Lens arrived yesterday (Tuesday). Will try to give it a bash over the next few days & post some images up.

This lens doesn't seem too popular judging by the lack of replys.

Cheers

Click to expand...

..........................................Why so unpopular?................................................

Nikon's own website shows this as one of its' two sample pics from the 55-300



They give 2 full size images of horrible noisy noisy blurry pictures that surely must be chasing away anyone interested in this new lens.



AndreaE's super sharp sample given near the beginning of this thread, showing the man with glasses and cap, is a million times better than what Nikon is using! ... and they still have that crappy ballerina picture up ... it's just got have cost them tons and tons of sales. What are they thinking?!?!?!

Hear2see said:

..........................................Why so unpopular?................................................

Nikon's own website shows this as one of its' two sample pics from the 55-300

Click to expand...

Hear2see said:

They give 2 full size images of horrible noisy noisy blurry pictures that surely must be chasing away anyone interested in this new lens.

Click to expand...

Hear2see said:

AndreaE's super sharp sample given near the beginning of this thread, showing the man with glasses and cap, is a million times better than what Nikon is using! ... and they still have that crappy ballerina picture up ... it's just got have cost them tons and tons of sales. What are they thinking?!?!?!

Click to expand...

Totally agree! I was completely stunned when I first saw the ballerina pic. I could not beleive that's what they had for an OFFICIAL sample photo from the lens. It in no way shows the strengths of the lens.

What happened in that ballerina picture?

Probably technique...but on a critical website during introduction?

Has me wondering if the collimator on this DX long zoom is quite restrictive and the "FX" 70-300mm VR II is the way to go!

I am amazed with my 70-300mm Nikon VR II and it can be used on FX as well as DX with a huge sweet spot on DX applications. I know it's probably a little bigger etc. but for those reasons of performance and going FX I think I made the right choice on this one.

I had to sacrifice too much sharpness and contrast with my Nikon 18-200mm VR so I sold it..with perhaps regrets as it is a good vacation lens but the Tamron 18-270 seems as good or better for less money.

I am now using a Nikon 16-85mm VR II mostly and it's sharpness and contrast are stunning and VR II offers a true 3-4 stop gain.

Throw in a Nikon 35mm f1.8 for low light and I think you are done with glass unless you want a Tokina 11-16,, f2.8.

then it's time to look at the D7000.

The new Nikon 55-300mm lens may not be super popular or garner a ton of attention but its price point is good, given its price its a pretty decent lens and affordable, not everyone can or want to spend $1000+ on lenses.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZSHNCC?ie=UTF8&tag=dslrcams-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B003ZSHNCC

Having been blown away by the great sharpness of a Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 lens , as I see it, it's new lens, tamron 70-300 with VC and it's new silent motor is to be considered as an alternative at a great price .

I only saw one review of the lens on the web on a japanese web site translated to english and everthing was extremely positve on it's color , contrast and sharpness , plus its focusing speed is accurate and very fast .

I guess being it new we will have to wait for more reviews to come out. Just my two cents worth.

It has been a few days so I was wondering if you've had a chance to evaluate the lens. I'm considering it because of its range and its light weight. The official Nikon pictures are so poor that it makes me wonder if there is something to hide. I have looked for any reviews and samples and the vast majority are quite positive but I'm not convinced yet.

In regards to the noise level on your Ballerina shot. It has nothing to do with the Lens.

It has to do all with your Camera not being able to handle noise levels not as well as other Cameras. Stick this Lens on a D7000 Nikon and take the same shot and you will be pleasantly surprised. Further more > under exposed Areas will produce some degree of noise anyway. Beats me why this one would be posted like that?

DKX" Go and get it" Nothing to be worried about. I bought one and it's a fine Lens. I can assure you there are expensive pro lenses that will cost you 5 times as much and the results on some of them are not surpassing the 55-300mm except for a faster focus and dust proofing e.t.c

I will add a few Photos taken with the 55-300 as soon as they are approved. ;-)

Taken with a Nikon 55 - 300mm VR (Photos slightly tweaked in Lightroom)