Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Nikon 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 AF Zoom [what you think]

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    jambutty53
    29 Jun 2012 - 11:11 PM

    Hi All
    Has anybody had any experience with or Views on the Nikon 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 AF Zoom -- Think it was discontinued around 1999
    One has caught my eye and I was going to put it on my d7000 its not local to me --so I am not able to try it out.
    Just a bit worried that this older lens may not have good IQ or be compatible with a newer DSLR
    Thanks in advance to any replies
    Dave

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    29 Jun 2012 - 11:11 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    Railcam
    Railcam  7447 forum posts Scotland
    30 Jun 2012 - 9:34 AM

    I cannot comment about the old version but I have the current AFS, G, VRII version and it really is worth the price - just over 400 new if you can stretch to that. There is slight pin cushion distortion at the longer focal lengths which is corrected by the click of a button in Lightroom.

    Definitely one of Nikon's hidden gems.

    I think the D7000 contains a focus motor in the body so the lens should be compatible. As the D7000 is a cropped sensor you would only be using the centre of the lens. I am using a full frame sensor on the new one with excellent results.

    Probably worth it unless anyone knows different.

    LenShepherd
    LenShepherd e2 Member 62359 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
    30 Jun 2012 - 10:12 AM

    The D version was quite reasonable for the era, though not as good as the current VR. It was introduced in 1998.
    There was also a G version, built down to a price to make "affordable kits" possible. It was introduced in 2000. It's reputation is not good though I have never used it.
    Which version are you looking at?

    MikeRC
    MikeRC e2 Member 83464 forum postsMikeRC vcard United Kingdom
    30 Jun 2012 - 10:16 AM

    'gotta be cheap...I sold that lens a few years ago for 50...and struggled to get that.
    ....far better you buy the Nikon 70-300 VR which is an excellent lens...pick these up SH for little more than 250.

    ...taken with the 70-300 VR

    3-tn-the-ballet-dancer-2.jpg....

    peterjones
    peterjones e2 Member 123785 forum postspeterjones vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    30 Jun 2012 - 4:13 PM

    the current 70-300 VR is a gem of a lens; it produces the goods with my D7000 and D90; I bought mine s/h from an epz member and never have regretted it.

    jambutty53
    30 Jun 2012 - 5:31 PM

    Not sure of version --- It was Grays of westminster that was selling the Lens -- not showing on website now, so it looks already sold --it was just a punt really TBH --hardly any info on the internet about the lens so i thought the forum may have some idea if it was a peach or a lemon - - the reviews and photo on the 70-300 vr looks good though -- Thanks for that-- may look at one of these.

    Dave

    User_Removed
    30 Jun 2012 - 5:45 PM

    Have to endorse what has been said above about the 70-300mm. For a (relatively) cheapo lens, it is exceptionally good.

    rhol2
    rhol2  3273 forum posts United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    1 Jul 2012 - 9:36 AM


    Quote: Not sure of version --- It was Grays of westminster that was selling the Lens -- not showing on website now, so it looks already sold --it was just a punt really TBH --hardly any info on the internet about the lens so i thought the forum may have some idea if it was a peach or a lemon - - the reviews and photo on the 70-300 vr looks good though -- Thanks for that-- may look at one of these.

    Dave

    I looked at the 75-300 some months ago, and found mixed reports so I passed on it.
    It was cosidered O.K. compared with the older 30-700mm , but nothing like the recent 70-300mm. VR.

    As noted above this seems to be a much better buy, even if a bit dearer.

    uzi9mm
    uzi9mm  378 forum posts United Kingdom
    5 Jul 2012 - 2:48 PM

    take a look at the 55-300 vrII since ive had it on my camera its never been off great pictures from it.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.