Hi, I have a N80 and some decent lenses.. (80-200 2.8, Micro 55, 28-105...) My question is how do you think/feel the new 70-300 G will perform? I know it is not extremely fast, but for outdoor still shots, some wedding shots (with tripod or monopod), flora... Do you feel it is worth the small price? It may help me stop using my 80-200 for general purpose / fun shots (and due to cost of the lens and its weight, that might not be a bad thing!) The low cost gives the impression that it might be low quality, but I am hoing the low cost is ONLY due to the cost cutting measures of no apperature ring - not an issue w/ the N80 Also, I think it is still uses distance info for flash ("D"), am I right? I am dying to see it/ try it!
I haven't had a chance to try one yet, but according to Pop-photo, it is essentially the same as the older model with the aperature ring. The exception would be that it is entirely plastic. It is indeed still a good lens. Have you looked at the non-G model?
I'm hoping the non-G model is going to get a bit cheaper, and I'll probably get that one instead.
Have you tried the 80-200 plasic version? It's VERY similar in design and the actual tube with the front optic supposedly will jerk about causing some hunting. The older one is more stable.
The old 70-300 was an "ED" lens, the description of the new one does not mention ED anymore. I don't believe that both 70-300/4-5.6 will stay in the market - their specs are too close. The question is how long would you be able to get the old version? It is the only affordable tele from Nikon which seemingly good optical quality.
I have the 70-300 ED lens. It is my impresssion that the ED glass made the light weight, low aberration design possible. At least that's what Nikon marketing put out. If the new G series lens does have an identical optical design (I have no idea) I would expect one of following two things to prove true:
-The G series lens will have more chromatic aberration and lower image quality than the ED glass lens.
-The ED glass performance edge will be exposed as marketing hype.
Only optical construction details and lens tests will prove which is true. My 70-300 ED is a great performer at a quite reasonable price, by the way.
So, the new G lens does not have ED glass? I don't understand why Nikon would introduce a new product with inferior quality? I hope not! I still hope that the low cost is due only to the less expensive outer construction & loosing the ring. I just thought a 300mm nikor under $200 was too good to be true. Something more to play with without getting dissapointed. I'd love to use it in a wedding or two, just to get that much closer than the 80-200. >
I saw KEH has them also. $129.00 I was thinking about looking for a used 70-300 ED since it has macro capability & ED glass. Not sure how much of a difference the ED glass makes, but the macro feature is key and I don't think the G does macro. Can anyone confirm?
BJ, Nikon states the ED does have MACRO capability and the G does not. " 70-300mm F/4-5.6D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor
This lightweight, compact 4.3x telephoto zoom features Nikon's exclusive ED glass for correction of chromatic aberration. With a close-focusing distance of 5', the 70-300 offers convenient macro capability with a reproduction ratio up to 1/3.9. The 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED is affordably priced within the range of almost every photographer. Accepts 62mm filters. Supplied with HB-15 lens shade. Wt. 18 oz. Dim. 2.9 x 4.6".
I was baffled that Nikon states that the 70-300 ED has macro because I do own this lens and there is not a macro setting on it at all. I do agree that it is a great preformer. I just bought a new F65 for my wife who is a bigginer in photography and planning to buy her the 70-300G for X-mas due to it's low cost. Top notch sharpness is not an issue for her at this point and should work well on the F/N 65.
Nikon may say the 70-300 ED has macro capability, but I own one and don't think of the lens as delivering macro performance. The close focus of 1.5 meters at 300mm may deliver a 1:4 magnification ratio, but that's weak performance compared to real macro lenses. And 300mm f/5.6 isn't something I've used much at close focus range.
Oh well, marketing is marketing. What's the close focus distance for the G lens?
Thanks for the quick input from all of your 70-300 ED owners. How do you feel about this lens? I wonder why they put that in the lenses description on the NIKONUSA site?? The G says nothing about it. I should just wake up right now and realize that the lens is probably not going to be an acceptable lens for client portraits or wedding work. I really wanted to get closer than 200 mm, but not go broke doing so. If the term 'you get what you pay for' is correct, I should shy away from the G now! What is a good 300mm or higher lens that is at least as high of quality as the 28-105? I don't need the weight or the quality of the 80-200 since I have it and use the heck out of it. Maybe it is the ED and it has been starring me in the face the whole time?
I'm very pleased with the performance of my 70-300 ED. It delivers sharp, contrasty images while being light and compact enough that it's not a burden to carry around. I consider it a bargain.
I just looked at Nikon's specs for the ED and G 70-300 lenses. They both have the same close focus distance, the same number of elements/groups. Since there's no separate macro focus mode for the ED lens, the G will offer the same close focus magnification.
I'd be willing to bet the G doesn't have ED glass, or Nikon would tout in in the specs. I'm interested is seeing a comparison of results from the two lenses. If Nikon simply repackaged the ED lens in a cheaper lens body using conventional glass we'll have an opportunity to see if there's a tangible performance different between the types of glass.
I personally wouldn't buy a lens with a plastic mount.
After checking out the 70-300G lens at the store two weeks ago, I ended up buying the ED lens instead. The construction of the G lens reminds me of my kid's plastic telescope. The lens mount is completely made of plastic. The price of the G lens is about 250 Cdn and the ED lens is about 460 Cdn. My salesman is concerned that he may not be getting more ED lens.
Hi, I've tried this lens (70-300 G), shot couple rolls and I didn't like it at all. Plastic mount!!Cheap. 70-300 ED much better quality. After trying 75-240,70-210/4.5-5.6 and several 70-300's I bought 70-210/f4(constant). Just can't afford 80-200/2.8 Regards, Vic