Nikon - Af 70-300/40-56 G Telephoto Zoom Lens (62mm) Review

What is It?

Nikon sometimes gets themselves into incredibly difficult to explicate positions. The 70-300mm logjam at the moment is one of them. Incredibly, you'll notice v different 70-300mm zooms in Nikon'south "current lens lineup."

And then before we go to today's lens, we need to exercise some 'splainin'.

Consumer telephoto zooms are popular lenses. Nikon's start lens in this range was the 75-300mm f/iv.five-five.6 style back in 1989. So came the long-lived 70-300mm f/four-5.6D from about 1998 to 2006. In 2006 Nikon introduced the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR, which is still available and was the primary consumer telephoto Nikon sold through much of the DSLR growth spurt. All told, the lxx-300mm of various sorts has probably sold in the vii figure numbers in terms of units.

Just that Thousand VR version of the lens started looking former and a scrap underwhelming with the 24mp DX and 36mp FX bodies. It really needed a refresh, and information technology got ii (three if you lot count VR versus non-VR versions). Get-go we received the AF-P DX version. Now nosotros've gotten an AF-P FX version.

Don't get confused past the similarities in specs. These are different lenses. Very different. The DX version has a very consumer build quality and is x ounces (265g) lighter. The optical design is simpler in the DX version and the cyberspace upshot is a slightly smaller and less expensive lens.

That said, many of the chief specs, such as minimum focus distance and maximum magnification ratio are nearly identical between the DX version and the new AF-P FX version.

Why was an FX version needed? Well, optically Nikon was pushing the boundaries on the DX version in terms of the imaging circle. A wider paradigm circle was needed for FX. But I think more to the point is that Nikon sees DX users different than FX users. So little things practice come up into play, similar most no manual focus ring, a 7-blade aperture diaphragm, the smaller f/6.3 discontinuity at 300mm, and more subtle things that new users probably wouldn't observe on the DX version.

This lxx-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR AF-P version of the lens that I'k reviewing hither is the latest FX version, and it merely brings a more prosumer sense to most of the design and build elements than the DX version did. And yes, optically, it performs a chip differently.

Okay, allow'southward become to the specifics of the lens under review.

The new AF-P lenses use a very dissimilar approach to focus motors. The AF-P lenses have stepper motors in them that are unlike the previous AF-Due south lens motors, which apply a piezoelectric or ultrasonic wave motor. The skillful news is that these new stepper motors are fast and placidity. The bad news is that just a few cameras are uniform with them.

Nikon has been doing some firmware updating to brand more cameras compatible. To see the total listing of what is and isn't compatible, see Agreement the AF-P Lenses.

The lxx-300mm f/4.five-6.iii AF-P VR DX was a bit of a surprise when introduced in August 2016. The 70-300mm f/four.5-five.6 AF-P VR FX version much less then (though the AF-P bit was a surprise to many). That's because the older lxx-300mm FX lens was showing its age on most of the newer DSLRs, specially those with high pixel density (e.g. 20/24mp DX, 36/45mp FX). Near of the Nikon community was expecting Nikon to but update the full frame (FX) lxx-300mm lens, not innovate a new DX-only version as well every bit an FX version.

So, to be clear, here are the five 70-300mm lenses Nikon currently sells:

1. 70-300mm f/iv.v-5.6G VR (United states$500) covers DX/FX (model 2161)
2. lxx-300mm f/4.5-five.6G (US$173) covers DX/FX (model 1928)
3. 70-300mm f/four.5-6.3G AF-P (US$350) covers DX (model 20061)
4. 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G AF-P VR (United states of america$400) covers DX (model 20062)
5. 70-300mm f/iv.5-five.6E AF-P VR (Usa$750) covers DX/FX (model 20068)

I don't usually put ownership recommendations in the first part of my reviews, but the complexity Nikon has introduced here has forced me to bargain with that:

• Do non buy #ii or #iii. No VR in a telephoto lens that you might handhold is a fault. Plus #2 is seriously not capable of handling the pixel count of the latest DSLRs.
• If you ain a camera not in the AF-P compatibility list to a higher place, your best choice is #1. It might prove satisfactory with your current older DSLR—particularly 6mp and 12mp ones—but isn't going to grow with you if you purchase a new DSLR.
• And as I noted to a higher place, buy #iv if you have a compatible DX trunk and aren't likely to movement to FX any time before long.

Anyone left? ;~)

I hope and then, because this is a very practiced lens.

Let's get back to specifications.

Nigh of the lens design is more complex than its DX cousin: 18 elements in fourteen groups, over again with a single ED chemical element to assist with chromatic abnormality control. The lens extends as you zoom it, with a single inner barrel extending outwards as much as 2" at maximum zoom. The zoom ring is marked at 70mm, 100mm, 135mm, 200mm, and 300mm.

• f/iv.five at 70mm (minimum is f/32)
• f/4.8 at 100mm
• f/5 at 135mm
• f/5.3 at 200mm
• f/v.half-dozen at 300mm (minimum is f/40)

Minimum focus is about 48" (one.2m), which results in a good-but-not-macro 1:4 maximum reproduction ratio. In that location is no focus point indicator or depth of field scale on the lens. Focus mode is adamant past the camera body switch or a three position switch on the lens (Am, Ma, One thousand). Like AF-S lenses, the AF-P lenses let user manual override of the focus at any time (but rotate the focus ring while continuing to one-half press the shutter release), though this is done via wing-by-wire. Fortunately that fly-by-wire is excellent in discrimination, though you may find that you accept to do a lot of turning of the ring.

The lens has VR built in, which is controlled by a switch on the lens (Off, On, Sport). Nikon claims 4.5 stops (CIPA) of stabilization.

Overall the lens is relatively small. That translates into 5.vii ten 3.2" (146 ten 80.5mm) collapsed, and 24 ounces in weight (680g). Every bit I've noted before, the DX-but version of the lens is smaller and lighter, which is ane of the reasons why that version is preferred for DX-only shooters.

Up front end nosotros take a 67mm filter band that does not rotate due to focus or zoom change. The supplied lens hood for it is the HB-22, the supplied soft case is the SL-1022.

Source of the review sample: purchased

Lens is fabricated in Thailand. Price is an astonishingly depression Usa$599.

Nikon'due south Spider web page for the 70-300mm AF-P.

How'southward it Handle?
There'due south non a lot to talk about with this lens, equally there are only two switches (focus mode and VR) and 2 rings (focus and zoom). The zoom ring is very wide and easy to find without looking. The focus ring is modest and closer to the camera than the zoom ring. It's somewhat hard to detect due to the narrow nature of the ring and its unusual position.

The zoom band goes from 70mm to 300mm in most a quarter of a turn, and unlike many recent Nikon zooms, has no hiccup in the middle of its turn. I'd say that's information technology's slightly rough, but there are no spots where the zoom is stiffer or less stiff on my sample, something we don't always see with the low cost lenses.

Where yous're going to probably be surprised is the focus ring: it'southward fly-past-wire. As such, it is actually silky smooth in rotation. Just here's something that you probably won't look: the focus ring does nothing if there's no battery in the camera. Fly-by-wire is wing-by-wire, and that requires power.

A lot of fly-by-wire rings are very sensitive, in my experience. Nikon'southward seems pretty stable and works pretty much as if information technology weren't fly-by-wire in terms of smoothness and corporeality of focus change. As best I can tell, minimum to maximum focus is a flake less than a half turn of the band at 300mm. As fly-by-wire focus rings go, this lens was as practiced as I've encountered to appointment, and really didn't requite me any pause. I really didn't care that the lens was fly-by-wire for transmission focus.

Overall, the lens is very hand-holdable and your supporting hand falls naturally on the zoom ring, which is where it belongs.

How's it Perform?
Focus: The big surprise is that the new AF-P focus motor is very snappy and most silent. Compared to the older Thousand version, I'd have to say this lens is much better at focusing. Faster, more sure, and eerily silent well-nigh of the fourth dimension. In Live View, the difference is very clear: the AF-P motors are fast for both stage detect and contrast notice utilize. Note that in that location's a tendency in Alive View to snap-check-focus as opposed to snap-focus. This is visually disconcerting, simply the speed at which the focus is obtained is still quite good, nearing phase notice speeds. The problem for this is video, where you become that little burp on refocusing that is visually distracting.

Sharpness: Nikon's MTF charts were tantalizing when they fist appeared. They showed 300mm contrast, for example, every bit an almost perfect flat line for 10 lppm. Pretty much everything that we were finding weak on the old version—other than astigmatism in the extreme corners at 300mm—looked similar it might be fixed on this lens.

Reality is slightly different. Just simply slightly.

Wide open, 105mm, 135mm, and 200mm look excellent in the center, near excellent at the DX boundary, and nonetheless what I'd phone call very good in the corners for FX. At 70mm, the far FX corners are clearly showing problems and generating lower acuity. At 300mm, the heart is just very good, and the far FX corners prove the same issues as at 70mm, only less so. Information technology really takes f/11 to pull in the corners as much every bit possible at some focal lengths, though I'd probably say this lens is best shot at f/8 overall.

Withal, wide open this lens is absolutely meliorate than nosotros saw out of its predecessor, pretty much on all counts, simply especially in the mid focal range and above. We're in a range of capability where I wouldn't be afraid to put it on the new D850 (don't take that statement incorrectly: you're going to still come across some loss of vigil fairly clearly out in the extremes, simply compared to the older 1000 version, information technology'southward no contest at all).

I would also  say that the two focal extremes on the new lens are just a bit weaker at the closest distance than long distances near infinity, something that'southward a bit unusual in Nikkor designs. Indeed, this is ane of the reasons why I think that some D850 users might find this lens very acceptable: at distance the loss of vigil is lower than close in, and the far corners actually perform pretty well at distance. This is a far cry from the older blueprint, which only had smudgy corners at altitude.

I attempt to use words carefully. Acuity refers to distinct separation on edges that makes for a crispness of the overall border (without having to utilise sharpening techniques to add together contrast to the edge). Then the edge of a building at distance shows as a make clean, well defined line if acuity is loftier, and a less divers line—but withal a line—as acuity diminishes. Smudging refers to clear optical aberrations that destroy a detail like a line. It'due south impossible to tell where the boundaries of the line are due to the pollution of data across a wide expanse. I never want to encounter smudging. I can tolerate some modest loss of acuity, particular since there are sharpening techniques that often can "restore" some of that vigil. A really good examination for smudging is small print (small for the distance shot). When letters blur completely together, you accept smudging. Where edges of letters have a bit of a blur to them, you have loss of acuity.

You may wonder near this lens versus the fourscore-400mm. At the wide finish (70/lxxx), the lxxx-400mm is just a flake better. Through the mid-range, they perform about the same, and quite well. At 300mm, the new 70-300mm is just starting to outshine the 80-400mm. Given that I like the 80-400mm a lot, the fact that this new, less expensive lens is keeping upward says a lot about how Nikon optical designs are progressing.

Also note that this lens focuses close. Sharpness is still quite good at close-in distances.

Vignetting: here's where Nikon compromised. The new AF-P version has significantly more than vignetting than the older G version. At 70mm, I'd tend to say this is ignorable, as the stop or so of vignetting I see is really constrained out in the corners (and gone by f/8). At 300mm, though, nosotros've got well more than a stop of vignetting, and it begins even in the DX portion of the frame. Past f/viii, yet, this is ignorable, though the older lens really had virtually no remaining vignetting at all at 300mm f/viii, while the new lens still has a bit.

Chromatic Aberration: surprisingly there was a tiny bit of longitudinal chromatic aberration broad open. Generally you don't see that in zoom lenses with slower apertures like this. It'due south ignorable, but information technology does border the bokeh a chip.

Lateral chromatic aberration is conspicuously present in the corners on high contrast edges at the wider finish of the lens, just surprisingly, not so much at the telephoto end.

Flare: The deep lens hood means that yous rarely see flare. When flare is produced, information technology tends to be mostly blue and greenish, and can be spread over a large portion of the frame.

I chose this sample image taken with the 70-300mm on the D850 for several reasons: (1) it shows off the sharpness of the lens (top flower); (2) it shows that the lens focuses pretty darned close; and (3) the background blurs (other flowers and the bud in the background) are very distinctly the new Nikon style of going from precipitous to blur without busy-ness or artificial expect.

Terminal Words
If you lot need a lower-toll, modestly calorie-free, competent FX telephoto zoom and have 1 of the 16-24mp bodies, this is a no-brainer: this lens is conspicuously better than the one-time G version, and holds its own against the more expensive lxxx-400mm in the overlapping focal range. There's not a ameliorate upkeep telephoto zoom choice for you. Fifty-fifty a quick comparo against a Tamron and Sigma competitor tells me the Nikkor is optically improve across a broader range of uses. Merely make sure your camera supports AF-P.

Other considerations:

• Versus 80-400mm — I've already mentioned that this lens holds its own against the lxxx-400mm in the aforementioned focal range, so you lot really don't go to the 80-400mm unless you actually demand 400mm. And call back, that lens is a bit softer at 400mm than it is at 300mm.
• Versus 70-200mm f/4 — Trickier comparison. That nearly extra stop of discontinuity at 200mm can be the decider for many. Technically, the lxx-200mm looks a bit higher in the MTF numbers I've generated on the high megapixel bodies, merely practically, I don't see enough difference to get excited nearly. If you want really great 70-200mm range, buy the lxx-200mm f/2.8E: in that location's simply goose egg else that comes close.
• On DX bodies — Doesn't require a firmware update for some older bodies like the DX version does, and is slightly ameliorate optically against the DX version in the DX frame. Definitely looks smashing on the 20/24mp DX bodies. Of course, it's bigger, heavier, and more expensive than the DX version, but it is a scrap of futurity-proofing for your gear cupboard if you're considering some day moving from DX to FX.

The real consideration may simply be cost and size/weight, though. This is a very packable lens with great performance, especially for its price. Every bit such, it's a great travel lens for telephoto needs, even on the high megapixel count cameras.

Again, the compatibility (may require camera firmware update; current as of last article update [run into engagement at lesser]):

• Not uniform: D1 series, D2 series, D40 serial, D50, D60, D70 series, D80, D90, D100, D200, D3000, D3100, D3200, D5000, D5100.
• Meter off defocus issue: D3 serial, D300 series, D700, D5200, D7000.
• Fully compatible with current firmware: Df, D4 series, D5, D500, D600, D610, D750, D800/D800E, D810, D850, D3300, D3400, D5300, D5500, D5600, D7100, D7200, D7500.

So, like the 200-500mm f/5.6, hither we have Nikon producing another telephoto zoom winner that would generally exist considered budget price (for Nikon).

Recommended (2017 to present) and a value bargain

Support this site by purchasing from the following advertiser:

spireslenst1996.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikkor-zoom-lens-reviews/nikon-70-300mm-f45-56-af-p.html

Share this post