Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nikon Telephot for D70?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 7:52:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hello,

I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.

Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the field.
And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.

I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.

suggestions?

Thanks,
Paul H.

More about : nikon telephot d70

Anonymous
January 12, 2005 5:40:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com>, hotchkisstrio
<paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> writes
>Hello,
>
>I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
>zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
>be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>
>Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
>snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the field.
>And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>
>I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>
>suggestions?

Nikon 70-300 f/4-5.6D ED

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=produ...
=&sku=149607&is=USA

(may have to cut and paste the above link if it wraps)

$250 after rebate.

HTH
--
Alex Wilde
Motor Sport Photography -
http://www.cizeta.demon.co.uk
January 12, 2005 7:06:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I have a friend who may be interested in selling his 70-300 lens. I have
seen photos from it, (not Bad). I think he paid under $150.00 for it.

Carlos
"hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>
> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
> field.
> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>
> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>
> suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> Paul H.
>
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:52:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Then that's probably the G, not D lens. If you're going for a 70-300, spend
the extra money for the D. I love mine.

Tom
"Carlos" <clamonaca@nj.rr.com> wrote in message
news:hn1Fd.44925$kq2.3150@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>I have a friend who may be interested in selling his 70-300 lens. I have
>seen photos from it, (not Bad). I think he paid under $150.00 for it.
>
> Carlos
> "hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
>> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have
>> to
>> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>>
>> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
>> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
>> field.
>> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>>
>> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>>
>> suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Paul H.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 12:04:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Personally, I don't see why everyone thinks the ED version is head &
shoulders above the "G" version. They sure look a lot alike to me in
construction etc; the only real difference seems to be that the D is more
retro, able to be used with older bodies. That one single ED element
wouldn't seem to matter so much.

LRH

"hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>
> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
> field.
> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>
> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>
> suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> Paul H.
>
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 2:24:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Read every test.
Shoot them side by side.

You'll see
"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:eUbFd.17749$c%.13836@okepread05...
> Personally, I don't see why everyone thinks the ED version is head &
> shoulders above the "G" version. They sure look a lot alike to me in
> construction etc; the only real difference seems to be that the D is more
> retro, able to be used with older bodies. That one single ED element
> wouldn't seem to matter so much.
>
> LRH
>
> "hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
>> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have
>> to
>> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>>
>> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
>> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
>> field.
>> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>>
>> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>>
>> suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Paul H.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 2:24:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Any good resources/links for detailed reviews of these lenses and other
Nikon lenses?

Thanks,
Paul H.


"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:_5cFd.8666$tF.7976@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> Read every test.
> Shoot them side by side.
>
> You'll see
> "Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
> news:eUbFd.17749$c%.13836@okepread05...
> > Personally, I don't see why everyone thinks the ED version is head &
> > shoulders above the "G" version. They sure look a lot alike to me in
> > construction etc; the only real difference seems to be that the D is
more
> > retro, able to be used with older bodies. That one single ED element
> > wouldn't seem to matter so much.
> >
> > LRH
> >
> > "hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or
telephoto
> >> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have
> >> to
> >> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
> >>
> >> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
> >> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
> >> field.
> >> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
> >>
> >> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
> >>
> >> suggestions?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Paul H.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
January 12, 2005 3:32:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

hotchkisstrio wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>
> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the field.
> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>
> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.


I got the 28-200 f/3.5-5.6 & I guess it's not the sharpest but it's
quite small & light & only about $350 new. You can get the non-VR 2.8 in
about 80-200 used for cheap with the same glass as the VR but it's big &
heavy. Here's my notes on this question:
http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/photograp... with links to
reviews that are pretty understandable.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 4:55:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:52:30 -0800, hotchkisstrio wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or telephoto
> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not have to
> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>
> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the field.
> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>
> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>
> suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> Paul H.

You might look at the Tamron AF Aspherical XR Di which is a 28-300 zoom.
The list price is $399 and they had a $20 rebate, not sure how long that is
available. I just acquired one and its great.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:15:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:38:16 -0800, in rec.photo.digital "hotchkisstrio"
<paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Any good resources/links for detailed reviews of these lenses and other
>Nikon lenses?

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 9:55:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Yup. Try here www.nikonlinks.com
"hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cs3qqq$dcu$1@news01.intel.com...
> Any good resources/links for detailed reviews of these lenses and other
> Nikon lenses?
>
> Thanks,
> Paul H.
>
>
> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
> news:_5cFd.8666$tF.7976@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> Read every test.
>> Shoot them side by side.
>>
>> You'll see
>> "Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
>> news:eUbFd.17749$c%.13836@okepread05...
>> > Personally, I don't see why everyone thinks the ED version is head &
>> > shoulders above the "G" version. They sure look a lot alike to me in
>> > construction etc; the only real difference seems to be that the D is
> more
>> > retro, able to be used with older bodies. That one single ED element
>> > wouldn't seem to matter so much.
>> >
>> > LRH
>> >
>> > "hotchkisstrio" <paulyhotchkiss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:cs1sce$h3t$1@news01.intel.com...
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I'm looking for recommendations for an affordable telephoto or
> telephoto
>> >> zoom for Nikon. I would like a good quality lens, but it does not
>> >> have
>> >> to
>> >> be of the quality of a 80-200 VR f2.8.
>> >>
>> >> Just something I can acquire for $500 or less and will give me good
>> >> snapshots of my kid playing pee-wee soccer from the other side of the
>> >> field.
>> >> And maybe an occasional picture of a bird.
>> >>
>> >> I have a Nikon D70 with the 18-70 AFS-IF kit lens.
>> >>
>> >> suggestions?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Paul H.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 2:01:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Tom Scales <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote:

>"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote
>> Personally, I don't see why everyone thinks the ED version is head &
>> shoulders above the "G" version. They sure look a lot alike to me in
>> construction etc; the only real difference seems to be that the D is more
>> retro, able to be used with older bodies. That one single ED element
>> wouldn't seem to matter so much.

>Read every test.
>Shoot them side by side.

The tests I've read say what Larry said, and say optically there
isn't much diffence.

The 'review of reviews' even pegs the G very slightly higher than
the D/ED, but both are 'average' (around 2.5-3 of 5). The MTF rank
for the ED is 2.4, but the G is unrated.

--
Ken Tough
!