AF-P DX Nikkor 70-300mm Question

Messages
16
Edit My Images
No
#1
I'm currently looking to add a zoom lens to my collection.

I've decided on the AF-P DX Nikkor 70-300 mm.

Edit: VR variant.

As this is a version designed for DX sensor camera's, I was wondering if this would be a true 70-300mm or whether this would be at 1.5x when on the body?

Also, if anyone has any sample images from this lens that they would like to share, I'd be very interested to see them.

Thanks!
 
Messages
412
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
it is a true 70-300 but designed specifically for DX cameras. The non DX equivalent is also a true 70-300 but would give a field of view x 1.5 if that makes any sense. The non DX lens will not vignette that is why it is more expensive, not cheap to design or build unlike a DX version. Are you on a crop sensor cam or FX ??
 
OP
OP
C
Messages
16
Edit My Images
No
#3
it is a true 70-300 but designed specifically for DX cameras. The non DX equivalent is also a true 70-300 but would give a field of view x 1.5 if that makes any sense. The non DX lens will not vignette that is why it is more expensive, not cheap to design or build unlike a DX version. Are you on a crop sensor cam or FX ??
I'm on a crop sensor (D3500).

Currently using a 50mm f/1.8G AF-S prime but it's quite an intrusive lens for wildlife (as most people know - wildlife are off like a dart when you approach), so really need something where I can stand well back, compose and capture some nice shots from a distance.

From what I understand, the DX version has a plastic mount but the reason I'm looking at this is because I've read its much sharper at 300mm than the non-dx version (please correct me if these are 'bad workmen blaming their tools')!
 
Last edited:
Messages
412
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
The FX version is "supposed" to be the best of the two. On a crop sensor you are only using the central part of the glass, so theoretically the image will be sharper whereas on a DX lens you are using the full amount of glass so the edges in theory will be not as sharp. Don't know if I am coming across sensibly but google will be your friend for comparisons, but ignore Ken Rockwells reviews, I take his with a large pinch of salt as he tends to contradict himself every few weeks.
 
OP
OP
C
Messages
16
Edit My Images
No
#5
Brill, thanks for the advice.

I should probably also factor in that in the (distant) future, there is a chance I'd upgrade to a FX sensor body, so having an FX version of this lens would mean omitting the need to buy new glass to suit, of course.
 
Messages
9,199
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
if you can afford the fx version then i would buy it,having said that i found the dx version on my d33/3400 bodies very fast and accurate to focus ,nice colour rendering,the plastic didnt bother me as im very careful with my kit,Thom Hogan gave a good review of it,but an even better one of the FX,i wouldnt think youd be dissapointed in either,quiet also
 
Messages
7,110
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
#7
Hmmm the idea is fine but the application is what bothers me ,even on a DX body 300mm for wildlife won’t be enough reach . Plus you have a fairly slow body ... my advise unless you are funds limited would be to save up a bit longer and go for something along the lines of a new or used sigma 150-600. .. I think you will find most of us have gone through the lenses mill . If your determined that 300mm is enough the Nikon 300mm f4 will take your photography to another level
 
Messages
310
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
even on a DX body 300mm for wildlife won’t be enough reach . Plus you have a fairly slow body ... my advise unless you are funds limited would be to save up a bit longer and go for something along the lines of a new or used sigma 150-600. ..
I had the d3400 and 70-300mm DX lens and while it suited my main use, as you say for wildlife its not long enough. small birds are never close enough to even fill a 10th of a frame. People i know that regularly get good wildlife shots are using the 150-600 on crop and full frame cameras.

70-300mm DX used it around £220
70-300mm FX usid is around £400
sigma 150-600 used is around £650
MBP prices

If wildlife is your main interest then its got to be the 150-600. if you are just wanting another general use lens then the 70-300 is a good bet in my opinion but you will find yourself wanting more reach if wildlife is a regular pursuit
 
OP
OP
C
Messages
16
Edit My Images
No
#11
Thank you for all the replies so far. Very insightful to hear everyone's opinions.

In all honesty, I'm still on the journey of finding my niche (which means I want to try different styles - whether it be portraits, wildlife, architecture, landscape etc). Of course, it could end up being that I like several styles!

I've taken a look at some smaller bird shots on Instagram (so most likely cropped as much as it can go), but image quality wise, they look nice. However, if I kept at the standard framing, it may look quite underwhelming.

Would this focal range be suitable for larger animals at the zoo, for example? I understand this is quite a subjective question but to say what I'd like to achieve; I'd be more inclined to take shots where I can fill the animal across at least 2/3 of the frame.

Again I understand that some animals are further away, pens are of different size etc.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,373
Edit My Images
No
#12
I am in the process of moving over from Canon to Nikon and wanted a 70-300mm. As it's for a D500 I looked at the DX version but it's a stop slower, build quality is not so good, it's supposedly not as sharp and finally (as you rightly say) should I want to change to full frame then it would need swapping ... so I bought the FX version.

I have to say I am very impressed with it, focus is fast and it's light, well built and just as sharp as my Canon 70-300mm L BUT ... it's not long enough for most wildlife shooting and so I have bought a Sigma 150-600mm (and half the time that's not long enough either).

I haven't used the lens that much but if you want to see a few shots there are some on my Flickr page HERE (fairly heavy crops)
 
Top