Which would you get and why? More reach? Faster aperture? Lighter weight? I want to pick up one of these two.
FWIW I have an older AFS 80-200/2.8 For when I need speed in this range and I have an AFS 300/4 which I love for it’s IQ but neither are something I would carry around on a regular basis.
I have both and have been trying to decide which to keep. Ultimately they really are very similar. The 70-300 has better IQ in good light at 300mm than the f4 cropped from 200 to 300. The 70-200 has better IQ in poor light because it's sharp wide open in its whole range and has excellent VR, and it's faster of course.
I'm torn on which to keep for now. I don't think I'm really ok with losing either one since they just serve different purposes. The 70-200 f4 actually makes a decent portrait lens if you're not a professional and wanting to spend big money on a 105 prime. I just took our family pictures with it a couple weeks ago at 200mm and just barely stopped down for dof and they turned out really nicely.
I found the 70-200/4 to be sharper wide open, but the 70-300 AF-P was very good when stopped down for landscapes n'such and it isn't terrible wide open either. The lighter weight and longer reach and seemingly snappier AF of the 70-300 was the clincher for me and I ended up selling the 70-200/4, partly because I don't want to get caught with a closet full of unused f-mount glass as I transition to Z-mount.
70-300 based on your need for something lighter to carry around. The image quality is really quite good for that purpose and when you know you need it you already have the other two heavier options covered.
Mathieu18 wrote:
Which would you get and why? More reach? Faster aperture? Lighter weight? I want to pick up one of these two.
FWIW I have an older AFS 80-200/2.8 For when I need speed in this range and I have an AFS 300/4 which I love for it’s IQ but neither are something I would carry around on a regular basis.
This write-up may be of interest to you - http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikkor-zoom-lens-reviews/nikon-70-300mm-f45-56-af-p.html - I do own the 70-300 AF-P (the FX version, NOT the lesser DX version) and use it on my Z6 and on a D500 (becomes 105-450mm in DX). Works great, especially on the Z6; focus is fast and very good. At the long end there is significant vignetting. However, it is correctable in post processing of a raw file. Nice that it has the "Sport" VR too.
Thanks for all the thoughts... not sure it's helped me pick though! Read Thom's review, as well as his write up on the 70-200/4. Sounds like there aren't really wrong choices... I'm leaning f/4 version for almost a stop at 200mm, as well as fixed length vs the 70-300. But lighter and an extra 100mm reach... it's still almost a 50/50 choice...
James Farrell wrote:
This write-up may be of interest to you - http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikkor-zoom-lens-reviews/nikon-70-300mm-f45-56-af-p.html - I do own the 70-300 AF-P (the FX version, NOT the lesser DX version) and use it on my Z6 and on a D500 (becomes 105-450mm in DX). Works great, especially on the Z6; focus is fast and very good. At the long end there is significant vignetting. However, it is correctable in post processing of a raw file. Nice that it has the "Sport" VR too.
I've been wondering this same thing. It seems either of these would make a great long member of a landscape trinity, with the 14-30 and 24-70 f/4 S lenses, on a Z7.
There's a good review of the 70-300 AF-P here, which includes a direct comparison to several other lenses including the 70-200mm f/4.
Chris Court wrote:
I've been wondering this same thing. It seems either of these would make a great long member of a landscape trinity, with the 14-30 and 24-70 f/4 S lenses, on a Z7.
There's a good review of the 70-300 AF-P here, which includes a direct comparison to several other lenses including the 70-200mm f/4.
C
Agreed, I don't think there is a wrong/bad choice... but still trade offs... For me I think it's the constant f/4 that's most appealing, it'll be basically a full stop faster at 200mm...
Don't have the 70-300 AF-P FX but I cover the range with four other Nikkor zooms: 55-200 DX, 70-300 AF-P DX, 70-200/4, and 70-200/2.8E. All are excellent but the best in absolute terms is the 70-200/4. It's my go-to lens in the studio (portraits, tabletop).
rico wrote:
Don't have the 70-300 AF-P FX but I cover the range with four other Nikkor zooms: 55-200 DX, 70-300 AF-P DX, 70-200/4, and 70-200/2.8E. All are excellent but the best in absolute terms is the 70-200/4. It's my go-to lens in the studio (portraits, tabletop).
Is the 70-200 f4 really better than the 70-200mm 2.8e ? Surprised to hear that
I recently picked up a used copy of the 70-200 F/4 and love it.
I was debating between this lens and the Tamron G2 70-200 2.8, but decided that I wanted the form factor of the F4, as it fit my current needs the best.
Regarding the 70-200mm f/4, has anybody used it with a TC? I've been thinking down the road of picking up a lighter zoom (compared to my Sigma 120-400mm) for travel with the same amount of reach.
It seems 70-300 and 70-200 still retain a size/weight that enables carrying around on trips with ease.
AF-P is for pulse motor. They use stepper motors to focus the lens instead of silent wave ultrasonic. They can generally focus faster and position the elements more precisely and are quieter for video use. All the new Z AF lenses use the same type motor.
paul85142 wrote:
What exactly is a "P" lens?
Regarding the 70-200mm f/4, has anybody used it with a TC? I've been thinking down the road of picking up a lighter zoom (compared to my Sigma 120-400mm) for travel with the same amount of reach.
It seems 70-300 and 70-200 still retain a size/weight that enables carrying around on trips with ease.
nikonos6 wrote:
Is the 70-200 f4 really better than the 70-200mm 2.8e ?
A faster lens must work disproportionately harder to maintain optical aberrations at the same level as a slower lens—and the 70-200/4G is no kit lens. The 70-200/2.8E performs best at 200mm and the G is weakest at that FL. At every other FL, the G is generally sharper through the aperture range.
rico wrote:
The 70-200/2.8E performs best at 200mm and the G is weakest at that FL. At every other FL, the G is generally sharper through the aperture range.
That's a fairly controversial statement! MTF graphs I've seen (here and here, for example) put the 2.8E ahead at all focal lengths.
I haven't used the f/4, but have owned and heavily used all the Nikon 70-200 2.8s (as well as the 80-200 2.8 non-G), and I'll say it would have to be a pretty incredible zoom to best the latest 2.8.
