55-300 or 70-300

RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
ok, now that I have had my stuff for a couple months .....and taken more than a few shots..... I have decided I should have purchased the 55-300 instead of the 55-200 that I bought with my D5100.

I see a few options.... and these also take into my budget....
1 keep what I have and pick up a 300 or 400 fixed fl manual focus lens, likely least expensive

2 pick up the 55-300...... What do I do with the 55-200? Suspect sell it as I do not see the needto keep both as related to the overlap in range and likely similar build quality.

3 pick up the 70-300....... probably should also sell the 55-200... Curious here, is the 70 that much better than the 55? Looking at specs between the 2 I do not see the difference...

Really looking for why or whynot on either choice and between 2 & 3,would there be a reason to keep the 55-200?

Also, is the 70-300 that much better than 55-300 & why? Its about 110 more than the 55.

Thanks for opinions & experiences.

Pat inNH
 
Last edited:
S

Sambr

Senior Member
I like love my 300mm F4 Nikon, I would be lost without it. However I also have the 70-300VR I like it more than the 55-300 for many reason and the fact it has a "metal mount" unlike the 55-300 has a plastic mount.
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
The 70-300vr is also an Fx lens, if you ever go to fx, you are all set. I've read that the 70-300 hunts for focus a bit less than the 55-300, but they both do. Some folks feel the 70-300 has slightly better IQ on a Dx camera as more of the center on the lens is used. I've onwed both and sold both as I rarely go over 85mm (especially now).
 
R

RickSawThat

Senior Member
I found a 70-300VR on Craigslist for a decent price a while ago. This is the lens that is on my camera at least 80% of the time. Almost 100% of the images on the "ricksawthat" daily posts are done with this lens. That gives you a good idea of actual pics shot with the lens. I have never used the 55-300 so I can't speak about that one. I also use a D5100 like you.
 
A

AxeMan - Rick S.

Senior Member
The 5100 is a cropped sensor (x 1.5) so your 70-300 is going to be a 105 - 450 if my thinking is correct. Going to help on the long end but might hurt you on the short end.

If it were me I go with the 50-300 just so I would have some workable range on the short end, and sell the 55-200. Once you move away from the 55-200 you will never use it again.

On the other side of the coin, RickSawThat's 365 is a testimony of what the 70-300 can do on the D5100. However I like to point out most of his photo's are shot at ISO 1000 or higher in most cases. It's something to think about you're going to need a high ISO to get your shutter speed above 400 to cover the length of your lens in the ISO triangle. This is typical of "Slower" glass at f5.6 and not saying the 50-300 would be any better. I imagine it would be the same.

As pointed out the 70-300 is an FX lens, FX bodies can handle the higher ISO a lot better then SOME DX bodies. I have never used a D5100 I can not say how it performs at a higher ISO. I have one lens that is an FX and on my D90 I'm not too happy with the way it performs, and since moving to fast glass a year ago it has sat in my bag.

As a side note; Rick, I'm not knocking your work your making that lens and body work really well together. Keep up the great work! I would like to see what you could do with a f2.8 70-200 lens or longer some day. :D
 
T

TedG954

Senior Member
Personally, I'd just continue using the 55-200 until I was so good that extra reach was the only thing missing in my photography. Saving the money toward an FX makes more sense to me, but I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer. :distracted:
 
R

Red Rover

Senior Member
If you are patient you can pick up a used 70-300 VR for $330-380. I got a mint copy over on the FM buy $ sell for $330. I have a 17-55 as well and have not had a problem with the gap between 55 and 70.

As Rick said, the VR is nice, and the lens is very light, yet well built.
 
M

Mestre

Senior Member
Also check the Tamron 70-300 VC, you can find a good deal and this 3rd party lens is as good as Nikon's 70-300 VR (and cheaper).
 
T

Tami Jo

Senior Member
RockyNH said:
ok, now that I have had my stuff for a couple months .....and taken more than a few shots..... I have decided I should have purchased the 55-300 instead of the 55-200 that I bought with my D5100.

I see a few options.... and these also take into my budget....
1 keep what I have and pick up a 300 or 400 fixed fl manual focus lens, likely least expensive

2 pick up the 55-300...... What do I do with the 55-200? Suspect sell it as I do not see the needto keep both as related to the overlap in range and likely similar build quality.

3 pick up the 70-300....... probably should also sell the 55-200... Curious here, is the 70 that much better than the 55? Looking at specs between the 2 I do not see the difference...

Really looking for why or whynot on either choice and between 2 & 3,would there be a reason to keep the 55-200?

Also, is the 70-300 that much better than 55-300 & why? Its about 110 more than the 55.

Thanks for opinions & experiences.

Pat inNH
Click to expand...

Pat I have the 55-300VRII Lens and have to say that I enjoy shooting with it. I also looked at the 70-300VR IF and contemplated picking that one up. But they appeared to be fairly close in IQ and you are not missing the 55-70 range if you choose to take just one lens with you. I have enjoyed the IQ of the 55-300 thus far. I will say at times it is a bit slow to focus and I've missed a few shots because it was hunting. I have heard similar comments on the 70-300 as well. Since I do not have that lens I can not confirm that as fact. I did however read the reviews and used those to help me make my decision. I believe that the 70-300 may be slightly faster in some instances due to it's ability to focus internally. Hopefully someone who has used both can reveal more information on this. For me I saved about 150.00 by going with the 55-300. I will use those savings towards a wide angle lens in the coming months. I am not planing on moving to FX anytime soon but if I stumble across a great deal on the 70-300 VR IF I may decided to pick it up. Some of these decisions can be tough.
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
I ordered a new 70-300 VR yesterday, it will replace my 70-300 D, which I bought 2nd hand off ebay and have been dissapointed with.
The D goes back up for sale today, hopefully I will get my money back on it.

From what I have read, the 70-300 is slightly better than the 55-300, and being an FX lens, swayed me towards it.
Hopefully this one will live up to my expectations better than the "D" model.
 
D

dragion

Senior Member
Hello neighbor :)

I just picked up the 70-300mm off Craigslist today...great deal for $320 in new condition.
It was used twice and purchased a month ago.

I also own the 55-200, but it is similar to the 55-300.
The build and speed of the 70-300mm makes up for the size and weight.
Since purchasing this lens, I probably will never use the 55-200mm again...will be carefully stored away along with the 18-55mm.

I would consider the 70-300mm over the 55-300mm.

My $.02.
 
T

Tami Jo

Senior Member
dragion said:
Hello neighbor :)

I just picked up the 70-300mm off Craigslist today...great deal for $320 in new condition.
It was used twice and purchased a month ago.

I also own the 55-200, but it is similar to the 55-300.
The build and speed of the 70-300mm makes up for the size and weight.
Since purchasing this lens, I probably will never use the 55-200mm again...will be carefully stored away along with the 18-55mm.

I would consider the 70-300mm over the 55-300mm.

My $.02.
Click to expand...

Wow that is an excellent deal If I would have found one at that price I probably would have bought it instead. I'll be anxious to hear more about it once you've had a chance to use it and test it out a bit. What a bargain!
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
Ok, lots of good replies, comments, answers in this thread. I want to thank each of you for sharing your thoughts... As one said (Tami Jo) these descisions can be tough... and regarding TedG594's comment of sticking with what I have until so good etc... That is good advice, BUT.. I have already had a few occassions to desire/require the extra reach and though not that "good" yet by any means, I am watching used... and that is what triggered this whole question..

I found a 55 - 300 refurb for like 219 and then a 70 - 300 2 towns over (2 months old) 70-300 for an asking price of 325.


I have not seen either yet but that is what got me thinking... when I first bought, I did not know how much I would go over 200mm if any... and so I kept my initial purchase down... after shooting several wildlife items and a couple planes I realized I could use the extra reach and was regretting...


Gonna go and grab a few reviews as others have stated.... I am somewhat frugal but also want what I buy to perform, hence my questions on image quality between the 55-=200 I have and the 55-300 and 70-300... My thought is buy the 55-300 and sell the 55-200... unless I convince myself the 70-300 is that much better... :)

Off to do some more research....

Pat in NH
 
D

dragion

Senior Member
If you are happy with the 55-200mm and just need more reach, the 55-300mm would be a better fit.
Getting the refurb 55-300mm for $219 sounds like a really good deal.

You actually have to see both in order to make this decision...can't go wrong with either one.

It comes down to what you really "want" :)
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
Tami Jo said:
Wow that is an excellent deal If I would have found one at that price I probably would have bought it instead. I'll be anxious to hear more about it once you've had a chance to use it and test it out a bit. What a bargain!
Click to expand...

Tami Jo,
I think that is the one I was looking at... ;)

Early bird gets the worm and the lens...

Pat in NH
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
dragion said:
Hello neighbor :)

I just picked up the 70-300mm off Craigslist today...great deal for $320 in new condition.
It was used twice and purchased a month ago.

I also own the 55-200, but it is similar to the 55-300.
The build and speed of the 70-300mm makes up for the size and weight.
Since purchasing this lens, I probably will never use the 55-200mm again...will be carefully stored away along with the 18-55mm.

I would consider the 70-300mm over the 55-300mm.

My $.02.
Click to expand...

Hey Neighbor, I think you just bought my Lens!!! :(

I suspect that was the same one I was looking at... I saw it while in Michigan and this morning it was not listed and I was guessing it was grabbed... Glad that you got it, was the person out of Lowell? It sounded to be a good deal. Best of luck with it ... the 55-300 is still available for me!

Pat in NH
 
D

dragion

Senior Member
Tami Jo said:
Wow that is an excellent deal If I would have found one at that price I probably would have bought it instead. I'll be anxious to hear more about it once you've had a chance to use it and test it out a bit. What a bargain!
Click to expand...

RockyNH said:
Tami Jo,
I think that is the one I was looking at... ;)

Early bird gets the worm and the lens...

Pat in NH
Click to expand...

Sorry Pat! :eek:

Was the seller located in Lowell, MA?
Seller told me it was just about 5 weeks old and was purchased from Newtonville Camera.
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
dragion said:
Sorry Pat! :eek:

Was the seller located in Lowell, MA?
Seller told me it was just about 5 weeks old and was purchased from Newtonville Camera.
Click to expand...


Yes, lowell it was!! Just glad that one of us got it, at least we will know it went to good use!!

That was too funny when you posted you just bought one off of Craigs List... Enjoy and looking forward to hearing how you like it. I will likely grab the 55-300 while I can..

Pat in NH
 
Last edited:
Top