I’ve read good re­views of the Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR and some mixed re­ports of the Nikon 28-300mm VR. How do they com­pare in the 70-300mm zoom range?

Trevor Black­shaw, via email

NPhoto - - Niko Pedia -

Ja­son says… While a su­per­zoom of­fers supreme ver­sa­til­ity with­out the need to swap lenses on your cam­era, it can mean com­pro­mis­ing on im­age qual­ity. That’s par­tic­u­larly true of the 28-300mm VR (£750/$950). It pro­duces pretty nasty dis­tor­tions through­out its zoom range, and sharp­ness is lack­lus­tre at the long end. In the 70-300mm zoom range, it’s much less sharp and alot worse for pin­cush­ion dis­tor­tion than the 70-300mm VR (£400/$500).

Un­like Nikon’s new AF-P DX 70-300mm lens, the AF-S 70-300mm VR is full-frame com­pat­i­ble and com­bines ex­cel­lent im­age qual­ity with good han­dling, at a rea­son­able price. It was a clear win­ner in last month’s big test of bud­get tele­photo zooms (Is­sue 67, page 114).

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.