Nikon AF-S 55-300 and AF-S 70-300, just what is the difference?

MoonManMike

Senior Member
Apart from the focal length variance, just what exactly is the difference between these two lenses?

I've carried out several searches and it seems that some of the 55-300 have plastic mounts, whilst all the 70-300 have metal mounts. It also seems that there is little difference between the two in general usage.

The 55-300 is however, considerably cheaper. Does anyone know why?

Are there any other differences?

I need to sell my 55-200 and get one of the above lenses and don't want to go cheaper and wish I hadn't!
Thanks
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Well for a start the 55-300 will not work with a Full frame Nikon FX camera. So, if you (even in your dream) are thinking about getting an FX camera, it would be cheaper to spend a little more now than to get the 55-300 and then have to sell it to get the full frame 70-300.

Image Quality wise, I couldn't tell you the difference since I only have the 70-300 and never used the 55-300.
 

crashton

Senior Member
Mike- A friend of mine has the 55-300 & I have the 70-300. To me the 55-300 felt somewhat cheaply made. Also it is not internally focusing. For me that alone would be the deal breaker, using a polorizer would be a pain. Also the fact that it is yet another filter size bugs me too. The 70-300 uses a 67mm filter same as my 16-85 so no extra filters to buy. To be honest I have not shot with the 55-300 so I can't comment on image quality. My 70-300 was a refurb & bought at a nice price. If you search a bit there are good deals to be found on the 70-300.
 

MoonManMike

Senior Member
Marcel, thanks for the reply. I don't think I'll be upgrading the body from the D3100 for a long time, if at all. So that wouldn't really affect my decision.

crashton. some interesting comments thanks. I have read elsewhere about the 55 having a cheaper feel to it than the 70. The 55 is so much cheaper to buy, so I guess that could explain the cheaper feel. I won't be using the lens heavily, so longevity isn't necessarily a real issue. I'm really wondering what the difference is in operation. What do you mean by 'internally focusing'?
The filter size isn't necessarily an issue either, but is certainly something worth considering!
 

crashton

Senior Member
What I mean by internal focusing is the filter on the end of the 70-300 does not rotate as it focuses & the one on the 55-300 does. The most important thing is image quality. Start reading the reviews on the 55-300 it may be a good lens too.

Good luck Mike.
 

fotojack

Senior Member
I've had my 55-300 for quite some time, and I can tell you that the IQ is very good....at least on mine. I can't speak for what others are experiencing. As for a "cheap feel"....I don't know...maybe it's in the perception. My 55-300 has a metal mount, so that's not an issue for me. I suppose your choices would depend on usage and budget, wouldn't they? :)
 

MoonManMike

Senior Member
Ok people, I've taken the plunge!
I've ordered the AF-S 55-300 (new) @£160 and free postage from a supplier on ebay. I did find it for £139.99 on another website, but felt I'd rather pay the extra and get the ebay/paypal cover included

The reviews I found were almost entirely positive, with virtually every review getting 5 stars

I know I could have found a used 70-300 for similar cost, but would rather go new. It really does seem that there is little difference (so far as I could find) between the 55-300 and 70-300

So, I'll be selling my practically new 55-200, which will fund over half the cost of the new lens

All the help and advice offered is very much appreciated. Now looking forward to receiving and using the new lens :)
 

MoonManMike

Senior Member
Thanks crashton.

The new lens has arrived and pleased to say, it has a metal mount and the front end stays the same way up, so it is internally focusing. I've given it a quick test and am really pleased with the quality. Looking forward to getting some nice aircraft shots (which is one of the main reason for getting it)
 
Top