70-300mm AFP FX vs 70-200mm 2.8 FL

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
OP aaronkick111 Forum Member • Posts: 84
Re: 70-300mm AFP FX vs 70-200mm 2.8 FL

Snapshotx7 wrote:

aaronkick111 wrote:

FuhTeng wrote:

aaronkick111 wrote:

kenw wrote:

For real world stopped down landscape testing I find cameralabs has the most useful review images:

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-af-p-70-300mm-f4-5-5-6e-ed-vr-review/2/

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-review/2/

From the samples in there it looks like you give up very little IQ at F/8 between the two lenses.

Thanks for this think this may be a good option

While bench tests are of dubious utility for outright sharpness, I appreciate them for relative purposes - https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-70-300mm-vr-af-p/3

Sure, the FL is better but it certainly should be! However at f/8, I don't think anyone could tell the difference even at 100%. I have both lenses but I always use the AFP for landscapes. So much easier to carry and the length improvement is significant.

so you have both? I currently have the 70-200mm so if i never use 2.8 and want something lighter for landscape would you say it makes sense to trade the 70-200mm

You answered your own question if you never use the 70-200 at 2.8. The weight, size, cost, and purpose of the 70-200 2.8 is based on using it at 2.8 at some point.

I sold my 70-200 2.8 VR2 because as a hobbyist that doesn't shoot portraits or action shots very often, the weight and size just wasn't worth it. The 70-200 sat on the shelf most of the time because it was too cumbersome to bring on most trips.

I now have a 70-300 AF-P that I use with my Z6 and I bring it with me every time I bring my camera now because it's compact, light, and has excellent image quality stopped down to f8 and still very good image quality wide open. That extra 5% of potentially better image quality is not worth the weight, size, and cost of the 2.8 for my uses.

For landscape use I'd absolutely get the 70-300 over the 70-200. At $550 the 70-300 doesn't break the bank either. You could just keep the 70-200 for now and just buy the 70-300 to try out for awhile.

And you have just confirmed for me it has been sat in my bag but when i went away the other day i didnt want to carry it with me as a just in case i need it lens. I brought it originally thinking i would shoot low light sports but never happened

so i think ill just get the afp

 aaronkick111's gear list:aaronkick111's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR +2 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow