Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Lens

Ordered this at a great price well below others on Amazon and so was expecting the price to reflect the condition. But received the lens and genuinely thought i had received a brand new one. Excellent quality, no dust under the glass, no cosmetic marks or damage and came with cleaning pack, cap and lens pouch. Tested yesterday and everything seems to work as it should. Very happy customer, thank you.

Like a few other reviewers I have the 18-55mm kit lens but find its zoom capabilities rather limited. I also have the Nikkor 50mm and while it is a top class lens for portraiture it again (not surprisingly) has no zoom capabilities. So I was a little bit handicapped when it came to sports or wildlife photography. This lens plugs the gap very nicely. So like me you are probably an amateur photographer with delusions of grandeur and have been trying to work out how much more zoom do you get for your money and compared to the 18-55mm kit lens. Well you can directly compare it to a bridge/super zoom compact camera with 18x zoom. Although the quality of the image far out classes that sector. In real life terms this means you can zoom in on a rugby scrum if you're on the touch line. You can easily get that bird at the end of your garden in full frame and you can take pictures of your child at the nativity play from the back of the hall* *That's after you've asked permission from the headmaster, been CRB checked, had a DNA sample taken, probed, interviewed, micro chipped and then sought written permission from 300 other parents to be allowed to take photos of your son dressed as a donkey! Like all Nikkor lenses the VR switch works well and you are going to need it if you're taking photos hand held. The lens weighs quite a bit more than the 18-55mm kit lens but not so much that it will weigh your camera bag down. Being made of plastic certainly helps to keep the weight problem under check. Yes it's mostly plastic but its of a good quality and will take the odd knock and bump well. Quality of the image/ picture quality is excellent. If you want geeky in-depth reviews about it there are lots of nerdy charts and graphs on drop off, Dof etc on line. Lets just put it in amateur terms......its good! It takes nice photos with little to no distortion. A couple of reviews state that it is poor in bad light. I haven't found this to be true. If your camera is set to the right light conditions it copes as well in poor light as any of the others I have. Don't forget to order a UV filter cover for it. Better to scratch a cheap UV filter than this expensive lens!

For the money, this is a very good lens. It hasn't yet made me smile as much as some of my other lenses (e.g. the Nikon 10-24 or the 18-140) but it seems generally competent. I bought it to give me a long telephoto with vibration reduction capability (I also have the 70-300G, but this is only usable on the more upmarket Nikon bodies, and has no VR, which means it can only be used in reasonably bright light). I've mainly used this on a D7000 but also tested it on a D40. The 55mm wide end does seem more useful than the 70mm on my other telephoto. I took this plus the 10-24 (which is great for landscapes) on a short country walk last weekend and not missed the mid range. I don't think I could have done that with the 70-300. It takes 58mm filters, which is an odd size. I've bought a cheap step up ring so I don't go mad with too many different filter sizes! I'm standardising on 52mm, 67mm and 77mm, and using a dedicated 58mm UV filter to protect the lens. On filters, the front element rotates when focusing, so you will need to readjust a polarising filter after focusing, but UV and other uniform filters work perfectly well, of course. Some have commented on the lightness of the lens. At 530g, this is actually the heaviest and largest lens I own (it's a bit big for my standard camera case), but compared with professional/most FX telephoto lenses, it is certainly relatively light. You would probably notice this after a day carrying it on the D7000, but for short periods the weight is not a problem. On a D7000, it feels chunky but not unbalanced. It has a metal mount, and is weather sealed. Neither is essential for me, but they're nice to have. The zoom control is a bit stiff, but not at all jerky (unlike e.g. my 18-70 which seems to do some weird gymnastics halfway on the range). In use, it is absolutely fine. It's very big and grippy. Manual focus is a weakness of this lens, but I was expecting that from the reviews. The A-M switch needs to be turned to M and the focus ring is small (but serrated so it is easy to turn by feel). Fine adjustment takes care. On my D7000, which has two arrows as well as a dot, it's not too bad. On a camera with only a dot, I expect it could be extremely frustrating! The lens does also have a tendency to hunt in low light and doesn't always get into focus in the autofocus mode. It's not worse than some of my other lenses (e.g. the 70-300G), but it could leave you lost for a shot in low light. Give it reasonable light and it's fine. The autofocus is reasonably quiet (no whining like the 70-300G) and I didn't notice any strange noises from the VR (the 55-200 chatters away to itself when in use). Pointing it into the sun gives washed out colours all through the image (general flare, apparently), but unlike my wider lenses, I didn't notice any specific flare reflections in the final images. I will need to experiment a bit to get the best from this lens. Playing with it last weekend, I've got some good shots at all focal lengths. However, the vibration reduction isn't completely magic (maybe wishful thinking on my part, but some reviews suggested I might get usable photos at 1/8s or 1/15s). Anything below 1/30-1/60 at 300mm doesn't seem to have worked for me (including some obvious double images at 1/8s). But that's still pretty good compared with the 70-300G, which I would normally shoot on 1/250s or better. This is the cheaper VR, with no Active mode (for shooting from a moving vehicle, for instance), but I haven't needed that yet, and to be honest I'm not sure that not having Active VR is really a major issue for most uses (I don't take safari holidays or go to war zones). What is more significant is the slow autofocus speed. You might miss some action shots with this lens if you're e.g. a sports photographer (but putting the D7000 into continuous mode would perhaps overcome that). The manual focus is tricky enough that it takes some concentration and can't be done very fast. At the long end, the depth of field is very narrow, so focus really matters. The lens hood that comes with the lens isn't the standard Nikon twist-and-click: it pushes on and clicks into place. The mechanism feels less robust but I haven't noticed any big problems yet. It also comes with a soft bag for protection. I've done what others recommended here, and bought some Tommee Tippee bottle covers, which are nice and padded, and also have a velcro strap, and are not expensive. They're black so don't look too silly (and you can always use a felt tip to hide the logo if you're embarrassed). My wife did want to know why I was buying baby items, so you might want to tell your partner if you do this :) Overall, I'm not unhappy with the lens. It does a useful job and it wasn't expensive (buy direct from Amazon or another official UK reseller and get £40 cashback up to Christmas). If you don't mind the size and weight, it gives a much longer zoom than the 55-200 at a slightly higher price. Optically, so far it seems similar to the 70-300G (which is apparently almost identical optically to the much more expensive 70-300VR, but much more primitive mechanically). Other than the convenience of the focus and VR controls on the 70-300VR, I think you probably need to go to the big and very expensive 70-200 to get a much better telephoto in the Nikon range.

ottimo rapporto qualità/prezzo (qui su amazon... nei negozi a 400 euro è un pò caruccia...) ovviamente è valida solo per il formato dx.. non è particolarmente luminosa (da non usare di notte) ma fa il suo sporco lavoro e con la luce lo fa anche bene... stabilizzatore molto buono (ho fatto foto sportive in uno stadio di calcio e, limitando un pò le vibrazioni della mano, ho fatto foto molto ferme anche con tempi non eccezionalmente corti a 300mm... se vi trema la mano però il vr non può più di tanto...) è un'ottica pesantuccia e ingombrante, non è da portare in giro per fare le foto della domenica o di un viaggetto spensierato fastidioso è che quando lo spegnete rimane la lente del focus un pò aperta (per chiuderla dovete mettere in manuale e richiuderla... ad oggi non credo ci siano altre soluzioni)... capita praticamente sempre per queste piccole scomodità, oltre al 35mm 1.8 che ho già, penso che le affiancherò il tamron 18-200 per fare le foto "spensierate" di situazioni normali, utilizzando questo 55-300 per le foto più ragionate (e nelle quali mi porterei appresso tutta l'attrezzatura, treppiedi compreso)

Unexpectedly new lens with nice pictures

what else can I say, despite the low price, it is pure Nikon Optics, very sharp, the VR works superbly, and when put on a high end Nikon DX camera they work EXTREMELY well together. This is NOT a professional lens but for the price it is incredible, you would have to go well over $1000 to beat it(on a DX). great for animal and bird photography under normal lighting conditions, and you won't cry all night if you fall out of a canoe while shooting.......

I was on the fence about buying this lens or saving up a little more for the 70-300 Nikon lens for my D5100. I decided to go with this one as it was about $125 cheaper at the time (comparing refurbished models of both), and read that the main difference between the two was the faster AF mechanism in the 70-300, the fx compatibility, and the Manual/Auto switch of the 70-300 which allows manual focus without having to switch the autofocus off. The image quality of both seemed to be relatively equal according to many reviews, so I took the plunge. I was mostly concerned about the focus speed, but it was much better than I anticipated. The only time the focus took a long time was if it tried to focus in the 'wrong' direction and then had to move all the way back the other direction. This often happened in low light or if the lens was zoomed in all the way while trying to focus. This is easily fixable if you zoom out first, focus quickly, and then zoom in and focus again. Other than that, I didn't notice much difference in focusing speed than the 18-55 kit lens. I'm sure the 70-300 is faster, but for my needs this was acceptable. Don't expect fast AF-C focusing on fast moving subjects, though. The VR on this lens is fantastic. I'm glad I didn't go for one of the cheaper Tamron or Sigma zoom lenses that did not have any kind of vibration reduction. I never noticed how it worked with the kit lens, but when you are zoomed in at 300, it is clearly evident. If you are fully zoomed in without VR, you can try to keep the camera steady as possible, but it will still be shaky. With VR kicked in, pushing the shutter button halfway will magically steady your image in the viewfinder. It's similar to those FPS games that let you hold your breath when looking through a sniper rifle. I don't know how it works, but it's amazing, and lets you take sharp handheld shots zoomed all the way in. This lens is mainly for outdoor shooting with lots of light. Low light is difficult, but nothing a flash can't solve. However, using a flash will limit your max shutter speed to 1/200's of a second, and if you are zoomed all the way in handheld it is best to try to keep a shutter speed of 1/400 or faster. As a result, you'll have to be extra steady when using the flash if you are zoomed all the way in. All in all, I'm extremely satisfied with this lens. Pictures are extremely sharp at all zoom levels, Bokeh is great, and it's very easy to isolate your subject from the background. If faster AF is important to you and you don't mind the extra cost, go for the 70-300. If you are on a budget and want a good quality zoom lens, this is the perfect option.

Nachdem ich mir eine neue DSLR-Kamera gekauft hatte wollte ich nun das Standard-Objektiv (18-55 mm) um ein Telezoom-Objektiv erweitern. In die engere Wahl kamen schließlich die Telezoom-Objektive Nikon 55-200 mm und Nikon 55-300 mm (beide mit VR). Leider konnte ich vor dem Kauf keines der beiden Objektive selbst testen, so dass ich mich auf die Meinungen und Bildbeispiele in verschiedensten Foren stützen musste. Die Recherche war garnicht so einfach, da es zum 55-300 mm Objektiv noch nicht sehr viele Beiträge gibt. Auch Tests in Zeitschriften sind mir bislang nicht bekannt. Produktvorstellungen reichen hier, aufgrund fehlender kritischer Haltungen, nicht aus. Folgende Kriterien waren für meine Entscheidung ausschlaggebend: - Max. Brennweite - Abbildungsqualität - Preis Max. Brennweite Selbstverständlich ist dieses Kriterium schon ein wenig unfair für den Vergleich von zwei unterschiedlichen max. Brennweiten. Allerdings muss dies immer im Zusammenhang mit der damit verbundenen Abbildungsqualität (z.B. Rauschen, Schärfe, usw.) gesehen werden. Allerdings würde ja auch die Möglichkeit bestehen, dass die Bildqualität des 55-300 mm Objektivs ab 200 mm nicht mehr akzeptabel wäre. Nach den ersten Testläufen (mit den Variationen: innen, außen, Kunstlicht, Blitz und starke Sonneneinstrahlung) bin ich mit dem 55-300 mm sehr zufrieden. Es zeigt sich das im oberen Brennweitenbereich häufiger diskutierte leichte Rauschen, wobei dies noch in einem erträglichen Maße auftritt. Meiner Meinung nach lohnen sich die 100 mm mehr an Brennweite im Vergleich zum anderen Produkt, das sehr häufig als Geheimtipp bezeichnet wird. Abbildungsqualität Alle Kommentare und Bildbeispiele in Foren kann ich durch meine ersten Bilder vollkommen bestätigen. Das Objektiv kann gestochen scharfe Bilder und ein wunderschönes Bokeh liefern. Durch die Bildstabilisierung VR II wird gerade das Fotografieren im oberen Brennweitenbereich stark unterstützt. (Meine unruhigen Hände sind für diese Technik sehr dankbar ;) Dies kann öfters auch die Verwendung eines Stativs ersetzen - aber eben nicht immer. Ich bin mit der Abbildungsqualität im gesamten Brennweitenbereich zufrieden bis sehr zufrieden. Preis Zwischen den Objektiven liegt ein Preisunterschied von 100 Euro. (Wobei bedacht werden muss, dass wir uns im Consumerbereich befinden) Gerne hätte ich die 100 Euro weniger ausgegeben und damit ein - laut vielen Tests und Meinungen - gutes Obejektiv gekauft. Gereizt haben mich die 100 mm mehr an Brennweite aber schon. Ob es das Wert ist, muss jeder für sich entscheiden. Ich bereue die Entscheidung nicht. Zusammenfassung Das Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300 mm 1:4,5-5,6G ED VR macht eine sehr gute Figur mit minimalen Einschränkungen im oberen Brennweitenbereich. Diese sind meiner Meinung nach aber vernachlässigbar. Während Nikon mit der 55-200 mm Version ein solides Objektiv vorgestellt hat, das mittlerweile schon als echtes Schnäppchen gesehen wird, denke ich, konnte Nikon mit der 55-300mm Version, was Bildqualität usw. angeht, gut anschließen. So blieb für mich die Entscheidung, ob sich die 100 Euro mehr lohnen, ausschließlich auf die Abwägung zwischen 200mm und 300mm max. Brennweite beschränkt. Für mich hat es sich gelohnt.