LensTip.com

Cons: - Zoom could be smoother to use in video; - The optical performance decreases visibly after 270mm; - A shorter min. focus distance would make this lens more useful for close-ups of flowers

Pros: + the VR works very well (easy to have a sharp photo at 300mm with 1/30s) + the balance its fairly good with a D7xxx or D6xx + big zoom barrel easy to grab

Summary: This lens is one of the best option for wildlife photography on a budget form nikon. Although a bit on the big size and weight when compared with the Nikon 55-200 and 55-300, works very well with D7xxx and D6xx bodies. The focal range is very useful for although would be nice to have a shorter min. focus distance.

Cons: It is as they say, soft towards 300mm. Somewhat large.

Pros: Fairly light. Great IQ at 70mm and in the middle of the range. Good VR. Accurate AF.

Summary: I am happy using it at 200-250mm though. 300mm is not much better than 250mm cropped, so if you think of it as a 70-250mm lens it is great!

Cons: The image stabilization could be better. At 250mm+ sharpness fades.

Pros: Light, F8 great images. Great value for the price.

Summary: favorite lens for portraiture, outdoor sports, nature and wildlige.

Cons: It's very heavy. End result for low light is abit "darker" than expected. Image result is "softer" on 300mm but still acceptable.

Pros: Solid built, good glass, very fast focusing as claimed by all reviews, used unit price is not as expensive, VR is excellent !

Summary: Got it in a used pristine condition at a very good bargain price. Those who're on budget but still wanted a good solid sharp tele lens, this is the one u should go for. Trust me, it's far better than the 55-200mm. The extra 100mm truly given u an extra reach. Yes, it's softer at 300mm but it can be sharpened or edit on software. Only downside is its size and weight. But it's worth every single cents spent on it. Unless u're on tight budget, then 55-200mm is the one and only alternative, ofcoz, sacrificed the 100mm away ;)

Cons: Bad image quality at 300mm. Too expensive for what it is.

Pros: Very fast AF acquisition. Excellent image quality up to 135mm. Very good to 200mm.

Summary: A half-decent telezoom for amateurs. Why the hell hasn´t Nikon put the Af motor found in this one to some of their optically brilliant primes?

Cons: Bad image quality at 300mm. Too expensive for what it is.

Pros: Very fast AF acquisition. Excellent image quality up to 135mm. Very good to 200mm.

Summary: A half-decent telezoom for amateurs. Why the hell hasn´t Nikon put the Af motor found in this one to some of their optically brilliant primes?

Cons: Slow, especially at 300mm Soft above 200mm AF struggles at 300mm

Pros: Very good image quality from 70 to 200mm VR Compact and lightweight compared to pro lenses Very good price/performance ratio

Summary: A very good VR-equipped medium priced tele-zoom lens, relatively lightweight and compact.

Cons: a little slow on the short focal length end. Would have been nice to see f/3.5 vs 4.5. Images tend to be soft at 300mm.

Pros: almost no barrel or pincushion distortion. Image quality is awesome to about 250mm. Solid feel and good weight to size ratio... doesn't feel cheap and doesn't give my neck a crick.

Summary: Great lens... just wish it was a stop faster, but I still do love the lens.

Cons: IQ at 300, slow (f/4.5)

Pros: Great lens, image quality is superb from 70-200 focal length. Very efective VR

Summary: Despite being a slow lens, it is a great lens for the price. i was considering to buy a faster f/2.8 Sigma 70-200 last generation, but when I compare the resolution figures for the same apertures and focal lenghts, it makes me think twice. Even if I buy the Sigma, will keep the Nikkor, as it is much more "portable" .

Cons: IQ at 300.

Pros: Small size, fast AF, VR, great zoom range and excellent optical performance for 70-200+but not 300. As you approach the long end optical performance suffers (why I got a 300/4 AF-S), but for a travel zoom and compliment to my beloved 16-85 this lens is superb.

Summary: Perfect addition to 16-85 for compact travel kit.

Cons: Sharpness and CA pretty bad if > 200 mm Need training to get good results with VR and AF-S

Pros: Good to very good sharpness into the range 70-200 Ideal for portrait between 70 and 120 mm (APS-C), even at max apperture. Good stab VR, fast and accute AF-S

Summary: Good for amateur, pretty good for a semi pro No regrets with my NIKON D300 Next step , may be 70-200 2,8 VRII /NIKON D3 : another world

Cons: Contrast is somewhat low beyond 250mm. Some issues with chromatic aberration, so I am told, but this is corrected by the camera.

Pros: Light, sharp, good stabilizer, good AF, rather silent, agreable handling

Summary: My walkaround lens (on FX). Versatile with very good image quality. For portrait or indoor sports, there are better choices of course.

Cons: Above 250mm the lens is getting a lot worse, but that is usual with this kind of lenses. AF is not very fast. Only 4-5.6 but VR II will help you (2 stops or more).

Pros: weight, and the value for money should be 6. The AF is allways right on, I am outpreformed while I am used to work with manual focussing. The plastic feeling, your fingers don't freeze on it and it does not make the construction worse.

Summary: Just the best buy. It preformes just a good as any Nikkor professional lens. I own also the 70-300G-type, this lens is form another planet.

Cons: A bit plastic feeling. But much more solid than other 70-300 nikkor lenses. You need to stop it down to 7.1 - 8 to get reaally sharp images.

Pros: Light. Good AF and VR. Fits allmost every bag. @f/8 gets stunning results. Occasionally I can use pro-grade 70-200 2.8, but for hiking and longer outdoor hand operated sessions 70-300 is much better. Current iso performance of CMOS sensors makes poor light no problem for this lens.

Summary: Probably best price-performacne lens in this area. Read Thom Hogans reviev to get what is this lens made for.