Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

awa355
awa355 Regular Member • Posts: 130
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

I have the AF-P 70-300, a friend has the 100-400 (tamron). We both photograph sports, birds, etc. If I had to choose one, it would be the 100-400. The AF-P is an amazing lens for what it costs, but you can't beat that extra range.

 awa355's gear list:awa355's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D3400
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 3,997
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Olympus E-PL8 Olympus E-M1 II +10 more
OP (unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

NewP510owner Regular Member • Posts: 335
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

I have the FX  version  - its a great lens  kind of ticks  all the boxes.

BillW1204 Regular Member • Posts: 105
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400
1

I have the 70-300 mm AF-P FX lens and like it a lot.  I have used it on a D500, D810, D850 and also a Z7.  I find the results comparable from 80-300 with the results from my 80-400 mm Nikon zoom.  Focus is very fast (including on the Z7 with the FTZ) and the results sharp in my experience (at least when there is no operator error).  I do not have the Z6 body or the Sigma zoom.  I find myself taking the 70-300 as a nice light weight telephoto when I do not need a longer focal length, e.g., often for hiking or travel.  It also pairs nicely with my 500 mm PF lens (whether with one body or two), giving me one lens for more reach and one lens covering shorter focal lengths and giving me the flexibility of a zoom.

CMCM Senior Member • Posts: 4,457
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

I have both.  I really love the 100-400 for birding and sometimes for other things, but for non-birding the 70-300 is actually extremely nice and is a good FL....lightweight as can be, quiet focus, great images.  I can't really complain much about it and even though I have the 100-400, I wouldn't give up the 70-300.  It's so easy to carry around...

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon Coolpix P900 Canon G7 X II Nikon D700 Nikon D5600 +14 more
OP (unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Thanks, I'll probably swap for the 70-300 at some point. I don't do any serious birding, and when I do it seems 400 isn't enough anyway... the weight savings of the 70-300 is probably what's most attractive...

CMCM wrote:

I have both. I really love the 100-400 for birding and sometimes for other things, but for non-birding the 70-300 is actually extremely nice and is a good FL....lightweight as can be, quiet focus, great images. I can't really complain much about it and even though I have the 100-400, I wouldn't give up the 70-300. It's so easy to carry around...

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

CMCM Senior Member • Posts: 4,457
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

Thanks, I'll probably swap for the 70-300 at some point. I don't do any serious birding, and when I do it seems 400 isn't enough anyway... the weight savings of the 70-300 is probably what's most attractive...

CMCM wrote:

I have both. I really love the 100-400 for birding and sometimes for other things, but for non-birding the 70-300 is actually extremely nice and is a good FL....lightweight as can be, quiet focus, great images. I can't really complain much about it and even though I have the 100-400, I wouldn't give up the 70-300. It's so easy to carry around...

There's a major weight difference for sure!  The 70-300 is even lighter than a lot of much shorter lenses!

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon Coolpix P900 Canon G7 X II Nikon D700 Nikon D5600 +14 more
JulesH Forum Member • Posts: 87
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

I had both. The Sigma was too heavy for me to handhold. I am on the smaller side. I had the dock but didn’t think it was really sharp. I sold it and got the AF-P which is much lighter. I use it on the D750 and the D500 which gives me a bit further reach. I don’t think it’s at its sharpest at the 300 end. I also ended up getting the 200-500 and a gimbal for the tripod..

 JulesH's gear list:JulesH's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Nikon D750 Nikon D7200 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +8 more
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 3,997
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

Took a few shots yesterday with this lens. I took out the D300 in error,

still enjoyed using it.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Olympus E-PL8 Olympus E-M1 II +10 more
OP (unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Thanks. The 200-500 is tempting,  but it is big enough I know I would never have it with me, it would just sit on the shelf.

Thanks for the thoughts.

JulesH wrote:

I had both. The Sigma was too heavy for me to handhold. I am on the smaller side. I had the dock but didn’t think it was really sharp. I sold it and got the AF-P which is much lighter. I use it on the D750 and the D500 which gives me a bit further reach. I don’t think it’s at its sharpest at the 300 end. I also ended up getting the 200-500 and a gimbal for the tripod..

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

OP (unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

So the real question here, would you rather have the first one or the second one?

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

Took a few shots yesterday with this lens. I took out the D300 in error,

still enjoyed using it.

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

CMCM Senior Member • Posts: 4,457
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400
1

Mathieu18 wrote:

Thanks. The 200-500 is tempting, but it is big enough I know I would never have it with me, it would just sit on the shelf.

Thanks for the thoughts.

JulesH wrote:

I had both. The Sigma was too heavy for me to handhold. I am on the smaller side. I had the dock but didn’t think it was really sharp. I sold it and got the AF-P which is much lighter. I use it on the D750 and the D500 which gives me a bit further reach. I don’t think it’s at its sharpest at the 300 end. I also ended up getting the 200-500 and a gimbal for the tripod..

That's exactly why I didn't get the 200-500—I'm sure it would sit on the shelf too much.  Much as I loved the images I got from it, I just knew it wasn't a lens I'd easily haul around with me.  I prefer to shoot hand held, and after 30 minutes my hands in particular were really tired from holding it up and panning around with it.  So the 100-400 was a great alternative for me, and I haven't regretted getting it.

 CMCM's gear list:CMCM's gear list
Fujifilm X30 Nikon Coolpix P900 Canon G7 X II Nikon D700 Nikon D5600 +14 more
cosmicnode Veteran Member • Posts: 3,997
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

So the real question here, would you rather have the first one or the second one?

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

Took a few shots yesterday with this lens. I took out the D300 in error,

still enjoyed using it.

The Mustang is a fabulous machine, But it does not have the abilities of a modern supercar, so the McLaren for me, but maybe a Aston, or Lambo or or, ha decisions, decisions.

-- hide signature --

Mike.
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

 cosmicnode's gear list:cosmicnode's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D800 Nikon D500 Olympus E-PL8 Olympus E-M1 II +10 more
OP (unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,469
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

I’d take the Mustang myself, but then I have a shelf of Non AI Nikkors and Contax CY glass too...

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

So the real question here, would you rather have the first one or the second one?

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

FX, for use on a Z6 via FTZ.

cosmicnode wrote:

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

Which AF-P lens are you considering, The DX or FX version.

Took a few shots yesterday with this lens. I took out the D300 in error,

still enjoyed using it.

The Mustang is a fabulous machine, But it does not have the abilities of a modern supercar, so the McLaren for me, but maybe a Aston, or Lambo or or, ha decisions, decisions.

-- hide signature --

MattParvin.com
It’s a lot easier to post a photo than it is to write 1,000 words...
“I believe there is nothing more disturbing than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept” ~ AA

StillLearning
StillLearning Veteran Member • Posts: 4,381
Re: Thoughts: 70-300 AF-P vs Sigma 100-400

Mathieu18 wrote:

Recently got a 100-400 and it’s impressive for the price but still on the fence. 400 is still not really long enough, so 300 is okay (don’t do serious birding etc) and the size and weight savings are attractive. So... any thoughts on how the 70-300 AF-P compares? Mostly interested in 300mm wide open but any thoughts welcome.

If 300mm is long enough then go with the 70-300. These are from the 100-400 with a Z6. Testing AF on a street sign 50-60 feet away. I found the results with the Z6 inline with the D750 with minor AF adjustment. It is lighter then my 200-500 and much smaller.

 StillLearning's gear list:StillLearning's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D750 Nikon D7200 Nikon D850 Nikon Z6 +11 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads