My 70-300VR is my main lens on my D700. When I go somewhere, its on the front seat of the truck waiting to be picked up and used. I have the other lenses in my bag, but, none get used and abused like my 70-300VR.
I just got the Tamron 70-300 VC, and it rocks on my D300s. I had the 70-300 VR earlier and had to sell it. I choose the Tamron this time (125$ cheaper here in Bangkok) and I must say I am very happy. I was a bit afraid after the Nikkor, but no reason.
I have the same experience. Have shot two samples of the VR on D700,D3x,D7000 and D90. I currently have the Tamron (via some strange circumstances, chance), and couldn't be bothered to change back. I'd guess sample variation within brand is bigger than the average difference between the lenses.
The 70-300vr was great for last years Baseball Season with good
color and contrast. I'll use it again this year but have my eye on the 300f4 AFS since most of
my shots sit at the 300 mark.
You know I have that lens and love it but I don't get results as consistently good as trenchmonkey. It's a great lens for the money but I really admire TM's wicked good skill.
My first copy made me thinks what "Raymond could find in that lens", but my second and third were perfect... Money decided that there would be no fourth at this point of time
I have to say, my copy is no good. I want to love this lens, but I get better results from my 18-200 at 200 than this lens at 300.
I just got a 300mm f/4 AF-S, and now I can do some apples-to-apples comparisons at 300mm. Tripod mounted, MF via live view, ISO 100, the AFS is significantly clearer than my 70-300 VR, even on zoomed out pics, and even when comparing the 300mm at f/4 to the 70-300 at f/11 (the sharpest aperture on my copy).
From 70-200 my copy is very good, it just can't hang at 300. That said, the problems are much less noticeable on my D90 than on my D7000.
It's more like I've had 4 or 5 REALLY good copies. 