I have bought over 20 lenses in my life, some quite expensive, but never have I been as pleased with a lens as I am with this VR Zoom lens.

Nikon continues to be a leading manufacturer of great quality lenses.

A sports lens it is not but then that is where you need the really expensive fast lense

It is not in the super b lenses

Great lense, timely delivery!

and no one can tell me it isn't as sharp as the aforementioned f/2.8 lenses in those conditions

love my lense...

For me the issue of auto focus was nil as I have a Nikon D-2 and there is a built in auto focus motor in the camera these lenses were designed to work with these cameras.

I have had this lens for a couple of months now and it is by far one of my better lenses

My only complaint is that the auto focus does not work as well as the less expensive Nikon lenses.

I purchased this lens on 06/26/2009 and received very quickly and from the moment I started using it, it has become one of my favorite lenses

Other than that this is a great lense, especially for less than 200 dollars

Great lense

Nikon should be ashamed putting out such a horrible lense.

At 300mm the image is not razor pro sharp but still usable, even at f/5.6 - perhaps not as crisp as the more expensive lenses, but still usable for probably anything short of getting it printed in large format

I can't always blame the lense as I shoot very far objects and the haze make the picture look not so

I have the expensive pro lenses to compare it with and this lens is no slouch, it holds up against the best pro lenses especially when it stopped down to f/8-11.Above all the best part is the fact that this lens is light weight and compact so it is always with me when I go for a short hike or walk and the heavy pro lenses stay in the bag

Unless the difference in price is of little importance to you; or if you prefer smaller, unobtrusive lenses that still manage do their job exceedingly well, consider the 55-200 VR instead.

However, brighter lenses are larger, heavier and a lot more expensive

Love this lense on my D7100 perfect

Love this lense on my D7100 perfect

This is an awesome lense, especially for a novice like me.

Quite often people dismiss cheap lenses (under $200)

Excellent lense for almost every shot

I like buying lenses from the same maker as my body for a number of reasons, which is why I revisited the Nikon options only

All in all I think is it a great lense, good value with allot of versatility.

There are lenses from Tamron and Sigma that reach this focal length, but the usually lack either an internal focus motor (which I need on my D40x) or VR (which I personally need because I usually shoot without a tripod).

I was in shock when i discovered there are great lenses out there for a bargain.

This lense is great for portraits of active children.

You have to use this lense with stand..not good with night time photography..as all photos looks shaky however good product at less price

I have used this lense in various situations and can't complain.

At 300mm the image is not razor pro sharp but still usable, even at f/5.6 - perhaps not as crisp as the more expensive lenses, but still usable for probably anything short of getting it printed in large format

More expensive lenses give you larger aperture when fully zoomed, but this lens is provides a good overall compromise.

I have the expensive pro lenses to compare it with and this lens is no slouch, it holds up against the best pro lenses especially when it stopped down to f/8-11.Above all the best part is the fact that this lens is light weight and compact so it is always with me when I go for a short hike or walk and the heavy pro lenses stay in the bag

That said, I like long yet portable lenses, and after giving myself fits decided to "settle" for the 70-300 because it has VRII and AF-S.

Other lenses are working fine

But for the money...if you don't need a low-light performer (most my action shots at the longer focal lengths are outside)...this is the one of the BEST lenses in the price range/focal length

The 70-300 G is definitely one of the least expensive lenses to get you to 300 mm, but there are some tradeoffs with the low price tag.

The lens performs best in well lit environments and is capable of taking high quality pictures, but may require more post processing and effort than faster lenses to achieve these results

My only complaint is that the auto focus does not work as well as the less expensive Nikon lenses.

UGH other than that good lense

Love this lense!

The lens is acceptably sharp not Prime sharp or as sharp as my wide angle lenses but for something shot at 300mm with no tripod and hand held @ F 11 these turkey pics I have included are acceptable

Great lenses took a very long time to get but worth the wait.

If you NEED more light, or if the pictures you're taking are important, then maybe you should be looking at more costly lenses.

what an awesome lense

Even in comparison to some of the best and most expensive professional lenses I've used, the 70-300 VR more than holds its own.

The lense is great.

I call it a hidden gem cause it's affordable and gives me great shots that equal my more expensive lenses

This lense is the perfect lense for the parent looking to get up close and in the action at any sporting event your kid is playing in!

Upgraded to a much better lense.

Wonderful lense

Zooming isn't as fluid as some of the more expensive FX lenses are, but that may be reflected in the price points.

A sports lens it is not but then that is where you need the really expensive fast lense

I purchased this lens over a year ago and to date, it is still one of my favorite lenses to use

Great lense

Great lense

To be sure, the 70-300 is not likely to produce a BETTER image at f/5.6, say, than one of Nikon's top pro zooms at the same aperture: those lenses are excellent, as well.

But along with my Nikon 16-85mm, it's a great upgrade over the standard kit lenses as far as build quality and flexibility are concerned, but image quality does not increase much.

Like any lense I purchase I purposely test the lense in many situations which for this amatuer tells me what I will primarily shoot with this lense

Older lenses like the 80-200 AF-S and 80-200 AF-D are excellent lenses as well, but they lack VR, are not sharper than the 70-300, and they are still heavier and more expensive.

On the other hand, the low, low price means you won't get macro, ED, ultrasonic focusing mechanism, or the very best optics that much more expensive Nikkor lenses have

I do find that the picture deteriorates in focus nearer to 300 mm (which is common on cheaper lenses), the only reason I did not give it 5 stars.

This is a wonderful lense, and the price is good, providing amazingly sharp images from 70-200mm and acceptably sharp images between 200-300mm

The Lens is very good for being one of the more cheaper 70-300mm lenses that Nikkor provides.

Love my new lenses

Sigma 10-20mm, Nikon 18-55 (Ver 1), 18-135mm and 50mm f/1.8 as well as some older film lenses.

Many of these are Nikon's cheaper consumer lenses

Among the top two zoom lenses on the market for amateurs (18-

Note that there are analogous lenses available from 3rd-party suppliers, but my experience with the analogous lens from Tamron (Tamron AF 70-300

While there are certainly bad lenses in this price range, there are often lenses that are surprisingly good

and I am very happy with the picture quality, like most Nikon lenses the pictures often turn out better than it looked in real life

I would highly recommend this lense.

Great lense for the

Older lenses like the 80-200 AF-S and 80-200 AF-D are excellent lenses as well, but they lack VR, are not sharper than the 70-300, and they are still heavier and more expensive.