View Single Post
Old 09-29-2017, 02:00 AM   #13
Noct Foamer
Senior Member
 
Noct Foamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 571
Default

Unless you are planning on buying an FX camera in the coming year, I would buy the $200 version. It's an excellent lens and one I've thought about buying myself for use on my D5300. (I use that camera along with a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS as my compact travel outfit.)

The 70-200mm f4 VR is optically a better lens, but not by much. It's main advantage is it's a stop & half faster--f4. This means when the light is low you can shoot with a shutter speed twice as fast without raising the ISO. If you often shoot in low light this might be something to consider. On the plus side for the 70-300mm AFP is it's 300mm--50% longer. If you mostly shoot in the daytime I think you'll find that extra 100mm more useful than f4. The lens is also smaller & lighter which makes it easier to travel with and carry. Finally, there is a ~$500 difference (for a used one.) That's enough to buy a a Nikon 10-20mm AF-P and have $200 left over. Or, use the $500 for a trip somewhere you've always wanted to visit. Anyway, I don't think you'll see any difference in sharpness between those two lenses, especially considering most people shoot them at f8 for RR photos.


Kent in SD
Noct Foamer is offline   Reply With Quote