Nikon Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Lens

...its incredible. It can be a little soft, but if you're shooting DSLR, increase the sharpening on your RAW file. For the money, this is simply the best long zoom around (if you've GOT the money, get the ED glass). I use this lens for beating around, its the kind of lens that I carry when out bushwhacking in Bangkok. One of its main drawbacks is that it focuses very slowly and tends to want to hunt a lot, the way around that is to set it to closest subject and hope a cat doesn't run through the frame just as you press the shutter release (err, yep, that actually happened to me).

Overall, I think the G series has been unfairly maligned in professional circles. I have this and the 28-100 and they are both very good lenses, and at the prices they sell for, can be taken into places you don't want to take a $1,500 lens (dust, dirt, theft risk, the like).

When you purchase your average camera most will come with a lens in the 18-55 range. Or, offer a discount when you purchase the lens same time as the body. What is nice about this lens is that if your first lens stops around 55-70mm then you add this lens you will have a total range from about 18 to 300mm. (Depending on the lower mm of your first lens) Not too bad, one lens on the camera, one in the bag. Sometimes you just don't want to carry around the whole backpack.
I own a few ed lenses and they are a little sharper and a LOT quicker on the focus. To be honest, dollar for dollar, I think this lens is a better buy then my ED lenses.
On my digital SLR there are 5 focus areas, this lens has a tendency to pick one of the focus areas that I was not looking for. It seems as if it is adjusting focus just a bit too much.
One big benefit is the weight. For it's size this lens very light. This matters is you are going on a long trip and want to take a half dozen lenses.
If limited by funds, or if you take your photography as a serious hobby, a step above the average but not a professional obsession then this is the lens for you.

First, I'm giving this 70-300mm lens a 5/5 rating partly because the price is inexpensive (which is good in my opinion). Usually you get what you paid for, however in this case you get much more than what you paid for.

If your primary objective is to take pictures in low light situation such as wedding and concert, then get the 80-200mm f/2.8 or the 70-200mm VR f/2.8 instead.

Get this lens by any means unless you already have those alternative and more expensive zoom lenses that I mentioned above.

Pros:
1. Inexpensive
2. You can get up close and personal (300mm which is equivalent to 450mm if you attach it to a DSLR)
3. Very sharp and fast in bright light situation (outdoor etc), though it gets a bit softer as you get closer to the 300mm
4. Very light
5. Bokeh is suprisingly good
6. Great for portrait

Cons:
1. Plasticy build and looks cheap (but I don't think you should care on this)
2. Very bad on low light situation especially if the object is moving/sports photography, but still works fine for long exposure with tripod like photographing fireworks or night light building/city/car lights.
3. Focus seems to be slower on low light situation (focus hunting a bit more)

Bottom line: this lens loves a lot of light.

If you give this lens a lot of light, it will take good care of you.

Last but not least, after you get this lens, go and buy the nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF-D prime lens for $100 or less (equivalent of 75mm if used with DSLR which is very good for portrait and semi-zoom). This is a very fast lens and works extremly well in low light situation even without using flash. This lens will complement your 70-300mm lens very very well.

Happy photographing!

All right whats up with the title right ? It is about the lens 70-300mm Nikkor. I think every lens producer (every brand) should really have a MINIMUM QUALITY. This lens is a disgrace for Nikon. Now don;t tell me that "oh its great for the price" or "wow how much zoom for that price" kind of comments. This lens does not take good pictures period. Whoever says it does doe snot know about photography.

Check the list please;
1- YOU WILL HAVE LIGHT PROBLEMS. It is a lot of glass . Use the common sense please ! A lot of glass will not let a lot of light in. Dark photos mostly.
2- NOT INTERNAL FOCUS. Very unconvenient zoom action. No internal zoom.
3- NO VINRATION REDUCTION . You zoom in and take a photo and then look at it at your LCD it looks ok till you open it on your computer. It is likely to be blurry almost on every zoomed in shot. You need a tripod to take zoomed shots with this lens all the time period.
4- A LOT OF NOISE. This is lens is the noisest lens I have ever tried (neverbought it just tried few days)
5- DO NOT EVEN COMPARE OR CARE ABOUT THE REVIEWS COMPARES THIS LENS WITH 70-200MM f/2.8 or equivalent. They are not even in the same line of business other than they both zoom in. 70-200mm f2.8 is the best lens nikkor ever built for mid range telephoto.
6- HERE IS THE BEST ADVICE FOR EVERYONE (not that you have to agree. I am just sharing my experience) ;
IF YOU REALLY NEED A TELEPHOTO (ZOOM) LENS PLEASE SAVE YOUR MONEY SAVE IT TILL YOU CAN BUY YOURSELF A 70-200mm f/2.8 NIKKOR.
if no one buys low quality lenses like 70-300mm Nikkor will have to come up with better quality lenses for all. They will have to adjust the prices also. The lenses will not be incredibly high priced also. Buyer awareness is extremely important issue. Retailers making %60 to %80 profit on Nikkor lenses (Guess which ones) not the prime lenses the cheap ones like 70-300mm off course. Thats why you are seeing alot of comments saying "ohhh great lens and zoom for that price" Are you kidding me. Who buys this lens?