OVERVIEW:
I’ll cut to the chase any say this lens is super useful but it’s one of the least expensive lenses I use. It’s a 1990s vintage Quantaray AF 70-300 (for Nikon F mount) and it’s almost identical to some the Tamron and Promaster versions (they are optically identical, per testing). The Quantaray brand was sold at Ritz Camera stores, and I was told (by salespeople at their store) they were either designed by Sigma or Tamron (depending on the lens) and I’m pretty sure it was Tamron, based on how similar they are visually. This type of lens is one of my favorite tools, and certainly the most cost-effective type of TELE lens out there. I’ve tested (and created lens-sensor specific settings for) a number of lenses of this focal length, and I can say there are tons of them out there. Again, the interesting (and valuable) thing about this specific lens is that there are IDENTICAL versions sold under the Promaster and Tamron brands. It’s an okay lens based on my testing (and I can verify the optics of this lens are IDENTICAL to the Promaster version) and there are other Tamron versions that are not identical. I really like THIS version because it has a 1:2 macro.

MAIN POINTS:
PART 1: IS IT PORTABLE?
PART 2: IS IT AFFORDABLE?
PART 3: IS IT COMMON?
PART 4: HOW’S THE QUALITY?
PART 5: IS IT EASY TO USE?
PART 6: NEEDS ADD-ONS?
PART 7: WHERE DO I BUY?

PART 1: IS IT PORTABLE?
Yes, if you consider that the super-heavy and older 70-210 or 80-200 zooms would be the only affordable alternative. The weight of those older lenses, and the fact that those old tele zooms frequently have fungus issues, makes these 90s 70-300 lenses the most portable telephoto options on the market.

PART 2: IS IT AFFORDABLE?
Yes, it is this lens is super affordable! I’ve found them on ShopGoodwill.com for $10-20, and on EBay for about $40.

PART 3: IS IT COMMON?
It’s easy to find used (on Ebay) but it’s old enough that you’re not going to find a new one out there (on Amazon) so if I put an Amazon link somewhere, it might not go anywhere (because there aren’t any on Amazon) but I will change it if I do find one.

PART 4: HOW’S THE QUALITY?
I think this lens model is good. It’s not as good as a “professional” 70-200 2.8, but it is so much more convenient to pack and use that I don’t mind the differences. These 70-300 4-5.6 lenses focus much closer too, as the 70-200 2.8 designs don’t do often do that.

PART 5: IS IT EASY TO USE?
Except for the fact that I don’t use AF with these (adapted to Micro Four Thirds) these are pretty easy to use overall. Most of the reasons I mentioned above, but I’ll just say it has a lot to do with the small size and weight plus the fact they can focus close.

PART 6: NEEDS ADD-ONS?
The only thing you may need is an ND8 filter, because all VND (Variable Neutral Density) filters I have tried have a problem when you’re using at the long end of the zoom (TELE). Other than that, you will need an adapter if you’re using it on a Micro Four Thirds camera.

PART 7: WHERE DO I BUY?
ShopGoodwill.com has had some GREAT deals on these, but you can find lots of them on local marketplaces, and also EBay of course.

CONCLUSION:
I really think this TYPE of lens (1990s 70-300 4-5.6 1:2 macro) is one of the top 3 lenses I would never want to be without. It’s such a good tool at such a good price, that I can’t help but recommend it.

​​​

These reviews are just my opinion and are focused on my Q.P.A.C.E. packing method, so they're not comprehensive. I wrote these mostly to help me remember what items worked for my KIT PLANS (and which didn't). If I said anything negative I apologize, as these products still may work well for you in your situation, but they were not Q.P.A.C.E (Quality, Portable, Affordable, Common, Easy-to-Use) enough for my budget filmmaking KIT PLANS.