Telephoto lens?

[Pen]

Hey, just a quick question (maybe ) what would a good nikon telephoto be? ive been doing some research and must be missing something because i can't find what appears to be a good one thats not either over $2000 or thats way too soft, budget here is like 1700 at MOST i would really prefer under a 1000 but im looking at canon's 100-400 (for a canon) which is like 1600 so....ya anyways any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks!!! (i do not have a canon or a nikon, but will be buying a new dslr and starting from scratch on EVERYTHING so no ties to either company)

[dcclark]

Depends on what you want. There aren't many lenses Nikon makes right now which are noticeably soft. I would give the 55-200 VR a try -- it's very inexpensive, decent quality, but not built very well (plastic build). But, speaking as one who's owned and used it in the outdoors quite extensively, I had no problem with the actual quality.

Another option would be the newer 70-300 VR, with similar commentary.

[kirbinster]

The 70-300 VR is a good telephoto lens, but it is not very fast. If you use is in good light for subjects that are not moving very much it is a great lens. They can be had for around $400 used.

The "best" one is the Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 AF-S VR but it comes with a large price tag. If you shop around you can find good used ones in the $1300 to $1500 range, but close to $2,000 new.

[OsmosisStudios]

The 80-400, while not fast, fits just under your budget too.

[Pen]

kirbinster - i was thinking about the 70-300mm one, looking at the review from slrgear its blur index looks wonderful (for me) i compared the blur units to my current tele and at 300mm f/5.6 it has a blur of 2 units and thats what my current tele has at 200mm f/8 which produces very sharp pictures and i am very happy with, with regards to the 70-200mm lens i was really hoping to have a longer range than 200mm, currently i normally end up shooting at 200 because of the limitation of the lens, however i would love to have that additional usable range when i actually get my own gear
OsmosisStudios - while that lens does fit my budget and has pretty much the perfect range im looking for, the image quality at 400mm is pretty bad looking at slrgears blur index. Again i am comparing these to my current results and ive found that 2 blur units is good for my needs, at 400mm it needs to be stopped down to f/8 to get down to 2 blur units in the center of the frame, i mean thats what i have to do now, but that greatly limits my options in terms of light and shutter speed and whatnot, its right around 2 units at 300 f/5.6 but then i would just go for the 70-300mm as already mentioned, i was simply wondering if there was any other options
thanks!

[kirbinster]

I don't know what blur units are, but I would go by real life pictures rather than lab tests. Take a look on Flickr or some other site at actual pictures taken with the lenses you are considering. The 70-200 is so sharp that you can crop it down and still have sharper images than you would get from many longer lenses.

[dcclark]

Yeah... blur units are something I've never heard of. Look at real photos taken with the lens (and not photos of test grids and targets -- unless you photograph test grids for a living!) and decide if it looks good enough. Look in the middle and in the corners. If you can't see a problem, then who cares what a lab says?

[Pen]

well thats kind of my point, i use the real world pictures of from my current lens' and then compare using the ratings, i dont really KNOW what a blur unit is, but im looking comparably, i know that at around 4 blur units my pictures are unacceptably soft, when i looked at how many blur units my lens had at a set aperture/focal length combo, but i do now particularily have the time to browse flickr looking for pictures taken with 1 specific lens, unless there is some faster way that i dont know about.

[nathanbarlow]

the other option is going for fast manual glass - thats very affordable. Requires an adapter, but still cheap as, and if you do your homework, can get very nice glass.

[Pen]

ya, ideally i would like to buy new, it does not have to be a nikon lens though , but mostly what ive seen from sigma, tamron and the like is the quality is just not to par, but again thats from reading blur index's not actual experience so wondering if you guys have any more suggestions, thanks!