55-300mm VR vs 70-300mm VR

[callousparade]

I've searched through the threads on here regarding this question, but wanted to post a more specific one. How much difference is there between the autofocus speed of the DX 55-300mm VR and the FX 70-300mm VR?

My current tele is the 55-200mm VR, and have been using it to shoot surfers (on a D3300). The autofocus speed is fast enough on that lens, but i want the 300mm reach. Not shooting super high speed sports (in the sense that fast events in surfing stay in the same plane more or less)

The thing holding me back from the 55-300 is the consistent complaint about slow AF, but I'm not sure if I want the bulk/weight of the 70-300. I take meticulous care of my stuff, so build quality isn't a huge concern for me.

Also, any other comparable lens suggestions would be greatly appreciated! I also have the 18-55mm VR II, so i don't want a huge gap between 55mm and my tele.

Thanks all!

[Polar01]

I do not know about the 55-300mm, however I have the 70-300mm, both are f/4.5-5.6 lens, the 70-300 is a FX lens whereas the 55-300mm is a DX lens. I do know that the 70-300mm is very fast to focus on an object and hold that focus, now it is about $220.00 CDN more than the DX lens, I feel that it is probably the best bang for your buck of any Nikkor lens.

Cheers: Allan

[callousparade]

I do not know about the 55-300mm, however I have the 70-300mm, both are f/4.5-5.6 lens, the 70-300 is a FX lens whereas the 55-300mm is a DX lens. I do know that the 70-300mm is very fast to focus on an object and hold that focus, now it is about $220.00 CDN more than the DX lens, I feel that it is probably the best bang for your buck of any Nikkor lens.

Cheers: Allan

Thanks allan, and i think i am leaning in that direction now. Discovered that nikon has it listed for 300$ refurbished (as a manufacturing engineer, I love refurbished stuff. it's better.) Plus a 10% discount from nikon for signing up for their email list makes that price just way too good.

Edit: and then i realize that they just have a page with that listing price... but none in stock. so sad.

[IzzieK]

It is always good to have the FX version because later on, you will never know if you will want to upgrade to an FX lens, like I did. A DX lens on an FX camera will set you megapixels lower, while because the DX sensor is smaller than an FX lens something you won't have to buy later once you upgrade. DX is still popular but as we go along, our needs go forward too...just a thought.

[Black Pearl]

What camera do your shoot with?

A great deal of the AF performance is to do with the camera, its AF unit, the processor attached to the AF unit and then to a degree the lens.

[dje]

Paul

Is it possible to take your camera in to your local camera store and try out both lenses ? This is probably the safest way to compare the speed of AF of the two lenses on your camera. Test at 300mm and see what effect on focus time the focus starting point has ie how far out of focus the lens is before you apply AF. For something like surfing photos you mention, you would be best to achieve approximate focus first before actually capturing shots. This means the AF has as little as possible to do for the actual shots and is just "fine tuning" the focus.

The 70-300mm should give better performance with things such as sharpness at the long end than the 55-300 as it is one step up the ladder in price and performance and is designed for FX operation.

I don't do much with telephotos but I do have the 70-300mm which I occasionally use on my FF and it does the job for me.

Dave

[tclune]

I had the 55-200 and traded it in for the 70-300 some years back. The 70-300 is faster focusing and better made. However, I think the 55-200 was the better deal. There's not that much difference in reach between 200 and 300, so if you need more, you'll probably still want more than the 70-300 gives you. In terms of IQ, I thought that the 55-200 was comparable to the 70-300 over their mutual range, and the 70-300 is quite mediocre by the time you get to 300. So I really wonder whether you'll be all that pleased with this minimal upgrade. FWIW

[rpcrowe]

"Edit: and then i realize that they just have a page with that listing price... but none in stock. so sad."

I would assume that the Nikon refurb program is the same as the Canon refurb program in that items appear and disappear with regularity, depending on how many of that item were returned. Canon has a phone number to check if an item is available. I wonder if Nikon has the same. If I wanted an item, I would have patience and check several times a week or even daily...

I am a firm believer in buying Canon refurb items and suspect that if I were a Nikonian, I would also be purchasing via refurb. Refurb items have the advantage of a check by a human before the purchaser receives them. The price is usually good also!

[mrinmoyvk]

I had a 55-300 1st version (I guess Nikon has released newer version of the same). original version was pathetic in autofocus (atleast on D5200 and better on D90 but still slower than coolpix L110). However as you mentioned you are interested in capturing surfers (well lit climate), lens should perform enough good. (It sucks in low light)
I dont have any idea about 70-300 but have heard from my friend that it is amazingly fast (never got to try one from him)

[Myk]

I've searched through the threads on here regarding this question, but wanted to post a more specific one. How much difference is there between the autofocus speed of the DX 55-300mm VR and the FX 70-300mm VR?

My current tele is the 55-200mm VR, and have been using it to shoot surfers (on a D3300). The autofocus speed is fast enough on that lens, but i want the 300mm reach. Not shooting super high speed sports (in the sense that fast events in surfing stay in the same plane more or less)

The thing holding me back from the 55-300 is the consistent complaint about slow AF, but I'm not sure if I want the bulk/weight of the 70-300. I take meticulous care of my stuff, so build quality isn't a huge concern for me.

Also, any other comparable lens suggestions would be greatly appreciated! I also have the 18-55mm VR II, so i don't want a huge gap between 55mm and my tele.

Thanks all!

How much difference is there between the autofocus speed of the DX 55-300mm VR and the FX 70-300mm VR?

Stictly mechanical lock to lock comparisons on a D7000 here, also including the 55-200 and 300 f4 AF.

You might also consider the Tamron SP 70-300 VC; a bit cheaper then the Nikon, slightly faster at the short end (f4 vs 4.5), sharper at 300 wide open, similar af performance, and better controlled CA.