Camera Labs

Hello everyone I am a newbie in photography...

Can anyone please explain what is the basic difference between nikon 55-300mm and 70-300mm zoom lenses?

The 70-300mm is more expensive than 50-300mm although both offers the 300mm final range mark . So which one good and why?

From my limited knowledge and observation I know 70-300mm can be used with FX bodies, but if someone who owns a DX body and do not want to upgrade to FX in that case which one is a better buy?

Thanks in advance.

_________________
http://www.twitter.com/iKoptar

"Photography as a fad is well-nigh on its last legs, thanks principally to the bicycle craze."
- Alfred Stieglitz

Hello, koptar

There are a few differences between the 70-300 and the 55-300. The most evident difference between the two would be the range, the 70-300 is 15mm longer at the wide end than the wider 55-300. Another evident difference is the price, while the 55-300 retails for around $400, while the 70-300 is going to cost about another $200. So, what do you get for another $200? Well, the 70-300 is optimized for FX cameras, but works just fine on DX. In fact, it will give you extra range on DX cameras because of the sensor crop, giving you a 105-450mm equivalent. If you do ever upgrade to full frame in the future (even though you mentioned that you don't plan to in your message, it's still something to consider) the 70-300 will allow you to continue to use your telephoto zoom lens while the 55-300, although it would mount, it wouldn't perform very well.

The 70-300 also offers a few more features that the 55-300 doesn't offer, such as a larger, easier to use focus ring with manual override (meaning that to manually adjust the focus you don't need to switch to Manual mode, you just rotate the focus ring), a focusing window, a much better construction plus internal focusing. I believe that the front lens element rotates on the 55-300mm when it focuses, making it difficult to use filters (but correct me if I'm wrong).

I personally believe that the main advantage of the 70-300 would be that it's just an overall sharper lens, it's a better performer. Sure, the 55-300 is still a nice, sharp DX telephoto that gets the job done, the 70-300 just performs better and is very sharp, the 70-300 is kind of a hidden Nikon gem, it's a very sharp lens for an excellent price.

I personally think that the extra sharpness of the 70-300 is worth the extra $200 alone, plus you get some other features that I mentioned earlier that you won't find on the 55-300. However, it's your call. The 55-300 is still a great lens if you're on a tighter budget, but if you have the extra money, definitely go for the 70-300.

-Evan

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

It doesnt give you extra range. on DX it just gives you extra crop not extra range. 300mm lens is a 300mm lens. So dont buy it thinking 300mm will become 450mm on DX because it wont.

I can only comment on the 70-300mm lens, The VR ED G II (and I probabaly forget the rest of the alfabet which they put on the lens).

70-300mm is a very nice lens. Not professional status yet, but certainly upper midrange quality. It performs pretty good on DX bodies. Well actually i should say the lens performs just as good on DX bodies as FX bodies. It is just that the FX bodies have bigger sensors and therefore have better pixel quality, but thats not a fault of the lens.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 55-200 has a plastic lens mount while the 70-300VR has a metal one.

_________________
I've upped my Iso, now up yours.
Nikon D700, Nikon D80, Micro Nikkor 105 f2.8 AI-S,Nikon 85mm 1.8D, Nikon 50mm 1.8D, Nikon 35mm F2D, Nikon 16-35 f4 VR, Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 AF-S, Nikon 70-200VRII, Nikon 70-300mm VR, 300mm f2.8 AI IF ED, SB-800, SB-900. Noiseware pro,NIK Dfine, Nik Colour Effex, Nik Sharpener Pro

I believe that the 55-200 uses a plastic mount, whilst the 55-300 and the 70-300 use metal mounts.

The 55-200 and 55-300 are about the same aside from the extra range of the 55-300 plus its metal mount.

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams

The only thing thats annoying is the aperture on the 70-300. Wish it was slightly larger but for the price its quite tempting i must admit.

_________________
Nikon D90, MB-D80 Battery Grip
18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR Lens
Speedlight SB-600
Tamrac Expedition 5 Backpack
Sandisk Extreme 3 - 8gb
Vista Attaras Tripod

so far......

Yes, that's one of my main griped about this lens as well, it's a bit slow and the aperture is is too small when you attach a teleconverter.

Nikon Rumors actually posted a list of possible upcoming Nikkors (which you can access here) and on the list was a 70-300 f/4, but I don't think that it's very likely. A more likely lens would be the 70-200 f/4 (possibly Micro) which would be a very nice tele zoom.

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams