Jump to content

Difference between Nikon 70-300/f4.5-5.6 vs. 75-300/f4.5-5.6


tapan_mallik

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know about 75-300/4.5-5.6 and 70-300/4.5-5.6 lens? Does any of the lenses has macro capability? There performance at the long and short end etc.

 

<p>

 

I have looked into nikon website and I want to know from people who have either used any or both of the lenses. Also, I know the difference of micro/macro in Nikon/Canon world.

 

<p>

 

Thanks in advance to respondents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised you haven't gotten more comments on these lenses.

 

<p>

 

I own the 75-300 lens which I value highly. It is very sharp and

convenient to use on a tripod, and will focus down to 5 feet

throughout its zoom range.

 

<p>

 

It makes a great macro lens when one uses the Nikkor 5T and 6T

close-up diopters with it. One gets generous working room. I know at

least one pro nature photographer who makes all his close-ups of

flowers with this set-up.

 

<p>

 

The new 70-300 has gotten lots of praise for sharpness and lightness,

although it has also gotten some negative assessments of its

sharpness. David Reuther, who tests all Nikkor lenses for rec.photo,

doesn't think too highly of this lens.

 

<p>

 

I don't know who to believe in that regard.

 

<p>

 

When it first came out it was suspected by many of being a repackaged

Tamron.

 

<p>

 

I probably will not get one because I use my 75-300 chiefly for

close-up work. The tripod mount on this lens makes shooting close-ups

easier because it is so easy to switch from a horizontal to a vertical

composition.

 

<p>

 

The 70-300 does not have a tripod mount, which means that to switch

formats I would have to flop the camera body over on its side in the

tripod head, which is not as stable a position as one can get using a

lens with a tripod mount.

 

<p>

 

The 75-300 is long and a bit cumbersome to carry around; the 70-300

would probably be a better walk-around lens because it is shorter and

lighter. But shooting hand-held at 300 mm is a challenge with a

moderately slow lens like this one -- f 5.6 at 300 mm. Make sure you

use fast film if you try this.

 

<p>

 

But with every lens there are tradeoffs. Since I've got the 75-300 I

plan to stick with it. If I didn't have it I'd look seriously at the

70-300.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...