Seeking opinions on the Nikkor 50-300mm

rthomas said:

Here is the lens at 50mm: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B78GZ7w6L4anOG1LUy04RU05RzQ

And at 300mm: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B78GZ7w6L4anQTVxMjZiMlZGWjA

Click to expand...

RichardJack said:

Hi,
I used a 50-300mm many years ago. It was huge and heavy and not as sharp as my primes. It's not as sharp as the newer Nikon zooms. I agree with the suggestion about the 80-200mm f2.8.
That is a sharp lens. There are several variations so do your homework and read the reviews. On the cheap side, I am very happy with my 70-210mm AF-D f4-f5.6 Nikkor (does have an aperture ring). I originally bought it for my wife and was amazed how sharp and contrasty the images are. It's not built like a Gold Ring lens but for about $100 it's a keeper.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/7021056.htm
Rick

Click to expand...

rthomas said:

Not this one! I've put it on a shelf.

If I can find one, I'll get another Tamron 70-210 f/3.5 SP. Had one in college. I slipped on an iced-up sidewalk and fell on it. It turned into a fixed-focus macro lens after that.

Click to expand...