*Inexpensive.
*Very rugged as compared to other consumer lenses of the same type.
*Excellent sharpness between 100 and 200 stopped down.

*Slow AF.
*Diminished sharpness from about 200 to 300.
*slow.
*vignetting from 200 to 300, when under-exposing 0.5 stops.

This is an excellent lens, and very affordable. Considering the higher build quality, it is worth the extra $100 or so as compared to other similar consumer lenses.

This is a great "jack of all trades" outdoor lens, and also has a fairly close minimum focusing distance, which allows for some good macro shots.

I'm a little disappointed with the performance between about 200 to 300. However, I'm surprised to find that some of my best shots have been taken in this range.

This lens works best with 400 speed film as it sucks of lot of light. Otherwise, slower shutter speed and a tripod are much needed.

It not a Nikon 80-200 2.8, but its not 3.5 pounds, and $900 either. It's designed to be a light all-around lens that is well balanced on a camera body. For its build quality, flexability, and performance; this has got to be the best in class.

Customer Service

Not used for repair.
Nikon help desk is rude.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 70-300.
Nikon 28-105.
Tamron 28-200.
Others.

Small Size
Ruggedness
Much sharper than the 'G' version
Quite sharp up to 200mm

Slow focusing
A bit soft over 300mm
Could be cheaper

Much better than the low cost/low quality "G" version of this lens. Seems to be heavier and more robust also. Same size as the "G". Good sharpness up to 200mm when using a mid-range aperture. A tad soft wide open and over 200mm. Small size works great in smaller camera bags. Contrast and color accuracy also much better than the "G".

On the downside, this lens is very slow to focus even on well lit, contrasty scenes. It tends to hunt more than it should. Lens is overpriced when compared to the much faster focusing Canon USM model which is similar in price.

Overall a strong performer that will be a valuable part of my bag. I don't do much sports shooting so the slow focus is not a concern. If you are considering the low cost "G" version, do yourself a favor and write the bigger check for this lens. Much better then the "G" and worth the extra money.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

Canon
Other Nikon lenses

1) Good Range
2) Reasonable Price
3) Sharp
4) Hood Provided
5) Light
6) ED Nikon Glass

1) Above 200mm could be
better
2) Very slow AF
3) Slow lens due to the
f stop

This is a very capable budget telephoto lens, good for beginner. As compare to the much more cheaper G Lens, this is a hell of a better choice, given it's better build. Using this lens need a good sturdy tripod or by using a fast film. I have been using this lens during day with a Kodah Supra 400. Compared to a better faster Nikon AF-D 80-200mm f2.8, the only plus point the 70-300mm has is that extra 10mm in the lower end and 100mm in the upper zone. Given the choice, one should spend more to get the Nikon AF-D 80-200mm f2.8.

Customer Service

No chance to experience that at the moment.

Similar Products Used:

1) Canon EF 75-300

Great range, sharp pictures,
Beautifully inexpensive.
Lightweight.

Zoom tends to creep down with camera around neck.

Can't beat a 70-300 ED Nikon lens for $300.
Could be faster, but it would cost a lot more.
Terrific travel lens.

Similar Products Used:

None

Great picture quality and a great price!

The lens hood is a little tight and frustrating to quickly take on and off.

I really wanted the 80-200 f/2.8 but could not afford a $900 lens. So i went for this 70-300 f/4-5.6. I have been very happy with it and think it is a great lens for the money. A lot of people complain about it being made of plastic and being to light, but after using it, i had a much better opion of it than i thought i would after reading other reviews. I would recommend this lens to any casual photographer.

Similar Products Used:

None

Good zoom range, compact size, ED glass, two ring zoom and light weight (too light I might add)

The built construction of this lens is dissapointing (all plastic except the lens mount). Thank god the glass is not plastic yet.

This is a excellent lens for its value. I've taken excellent pictures with this lens. I sold my 70-210mm AF for this lens and the only thing I regret is the built construction (more metal) on the old lens but the finish quality is still very much Nikon spec. My Nikon 28-105mm AF D has similer quality but the inner lens barrel is metal not plastic like the 70-300mm. Some complain that this lens is missing the tripot mount compare to the older Nikon 75-300mm, but with its light weight (18 oz)compare with 75-300mm (30 oz), 70-210mm (20 oz) I don't thing this lens can hold up a pro body like the F5 (42 oz). I have no problem shooting this lens hand held and it also focus faster on my N90s then the 70-210mm. I think for a Nikon ED glass lens, it's as close as most photographer will ever get to for its price.

Customer Service

Never need it yet, that why I use Nikon systems.

Similar Products Used:

NIkon 70-210 AF, 28-105mm AF, 60mm AF micro and Sigma 28-70mm F2.8

The 70-300mm zoom range is versatile while the price is affordable. Performance is more than satisfactory but not outstanding for a Nikon product.

The zoom adjustment was too loose. Note to other users: Nikon regonal repair center adjustments under waurentee made all the difference. Would like a tripod mount.

A good lense to have when weight and volume are a problem. Performs well. I miss the extra f/stop of the 2.8 lenses but hesitate going to higher speed films. Tripods are not the solution an a ship rolling, pitching and yawing is an interesting sea. Deck vibration also a deterent. Still looking for the "ideal" solution.

Customer Service

Nikon regional factory repair centers get the job done. Most satisfied. Used on more than one occasion.

Similar Products Used:

80-200mm f/2.8
35-70mm f/2.8
20-35mm f/2.8

ED glass! Sharp at all focal point of the zoom. The colours are lively and the contrast is well balance without being too stare.On first holding it, it felt somewhat cheap...plastic feel...but for this price I am not complaining much. Though plastic...the finish is still very Nikon quality. The new 17-35 is almost like this and it cost 6 times more!...I think the plastic body shell is the next wave somehow to save on weight some how as more lenses to come might have built in both CPU and motor inside.

The zooming is too loose...at 300mm..the front extends quite a bit but unless you are hold the zoom focal ring...it will collapse when you try to aim the lense upward at an angle more then 90%. Withthe push of the hand you can retract the zoom back to 70mm. The included hood is a bit tight..it gets worst when you place a filter on the front.

GET IT!...It is worth every cent you pay. It is sharp and great for travelling. Couple this one to another zoom like the 25mm-50mm or the 28-70mm or the better 35-70 2f/2.8 and you have all the lenses you need for most occasion. It is the cheapest ED lens you could ever get to try out. It makes a difference.

Customer Service

So-so.....

Similar Products Used:

75-300mm
70-210mm Both Nikkor

Excellent optical quality - high contrast-high resolution - in a light, compact package

Supplied lens hood is rather tight fitting.

Cheap (for an ED Nikkor), light & good - get it!

Customer Service

good

Similar Products Used:

AF Nikkor 80-200 f2.8
AF Nikkor 75-300
Sigma APO 70-300

This lens is very light and easy to handle while giving excellent results.

None

This lens is nicely made and I have had great results at all focal lengths. It's very easy to carry so you are more likely to have it with you when you need it. It is a good value.

Customer Service

None needed

Similar Products Used:

Have tried other independent brands with inferior results.