Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

Started 4 months ago | Questions
Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

another Q of academic curiosity.

I have the little AF-P 70-300 DX VR lens and it is very good - using on DX obviously - D7500 and D3300.

Anyone used both lenses on DX bodies? Thoughts? Advantages of the FX lens over the DX? Performance differences? (I realise it has external switches for VR and M/A focus).

cheers Peter

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Nikon D3300 Nikon D7500
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Kenster63
Kenster63 Regular Member • Posts: 187
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

Perhaps better sharpness at the edges, since the glass near the edges of an FX format lens are cropped off by the DX sensor?

 Kenster63's gear list:Kenster63's gear list
Nikon D300S Nikon D750 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro +7 more
cyuill2007 Senior Member • Posts: 1,174
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

I own the older AF-S 70-300 G VR FX lens. It is sharp from 70-250mm, but softens up a bit from 250-300mm. Stopping down to f/8 @ 300mm helps. I once tested the newer AF-P 70-300 VR FX lens - it is sharp up to 300mm, even wide open. It is quite nicely built - not to pro caliber, but suitable for enthusiasts who don’t abuse their gear. It is supposed to be optically a bit better overall than the DX model.

The FX has the benefit of covering the full sensor on FX-format cameras. The DX lens will only be usable on an FX body in DX cropped mode. Because it is more versatile, I would go with the FX model if I was going to purchase a 70-300mm lens. The reason I didn’t do so when I tested it is because I decided to purchase a Sigma 100-400 instead. That lens is at least as sharp as the AF-P 70-300 VR from 100-300mm, and it zooms out to 400mm, where it is pretty good.

 cyuill2007's gear list:cyuill2007's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 V2 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +8 more
BillW1204 Regular Member • Posts: 229
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

I have used the FX version on a D500 and D7200.  I have also used it on FX bodies, including the D810, D850, Z6 and Z6II (the latter two with the FTZ adapter).  It’s a very good lens, particularly at its price.  Light weight, fast to focus.  I use it when I want a light weight telephoto option (if 300 mm is enough).

I have not used the DX version, but have heard from friends who have it that it is also a good lens.  Thom Hogan reviewed both lenses on his website.  I recall he thought the FX version was a bit better optically.

One difference that could matter to some — the FX version has a VR switch, allowing you to turn VR off and on, or switch from normal to sport mode, from the lens.  If I recall, the DX version does not have a VR switch, so you have to use the camera’s menu system to turn VR on or off or change mode.  I think the FX version weighs a bit more, but still seems quite light to me.

Not sure if I would buy the FX version if I already had the DX version and only planned to use it on DX cameras.  For me the choice was easy, as I had both DX and FX bodies, so I wanted to be able to use the lens on both types of bodies.

BTW, the FX version works very nicely on Z bodies, if you were to go that way.

graemechapman
graemechapman Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

In Australia the FX version is very expensive and not worth it.

I leave it on my wife's D7500 where it gets little use.

Cheers

Graeme

bookz Regular Member • Posts: 273
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

I only have the Fx version which I purchased recently when on sale for $400US. The fax is weather sealed and has be switches including a panning mode. It’s. Heavier but still feels light to me.

 bookz's gear list:bookz's gear list
Nikon D7200 Nikon D3400 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 40mm F2.8 Nikon 85mm F1.8G +2 more
OP Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

In Australia the FX version is very expensive and not worth it.

I leave it on my wife's D7500 where it gets little use.

Cheers

Graeme

the usual story for us here in the antipodes

rdavy Regular Member • Posts: 403
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

Was on sale at Ted's recently for $899. I used my birthday voucher for a further $20 off.

Probably not far off the equivalent USD price with state taxes ?

I don't own the DX version but I am impressed with the AF speed on my D600.  I have used it to photograph a running event, missing very few shots in AF-C.

 rdavy's gear list:rdavy's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P340 Nikon D600 Nikon D3300
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 15,476
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

In Australia the FX version is very expensive and not worth it.

I leave it on my wife's D7500 where it gets little use.

Cheers

Graeme

For fun, I tried the DX version with a Kenko 1.4X TC on my old D600, and it worked like a dream. It is utterly sharp at 135mm (better than the Zeiss 135mm primes), according to Lenstip's review, but that was the only thing they really liked with the DX version, preferring the FX any day of the week.

But as it becomes an f/9.0 @420mm (with the TC on) you really need good light.

-- hide signature --

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon D3300 +23 more
OP Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

Tord S Eriksson wrote:

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

In Australia the FX version is very expensive and not worth it.

I leave it on my wife's D7500 where it gets little use.

Cheers

Graeme

For fun, I tried the DX version with a Kenko 1.4X TC on my old D600, and it worked like a dream. It is utterly sharp at 135mm (better than the Zeiss 135mm primes), according to Lenstip's review, but that was the only thing they really liked with the DX version, preferring the FX any day of the week.

But as it becomes an f/9.0 @420mm (with the TC on) you really need good light.

you had me excited til I read the last sentence

OP Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

Cheers

Graeme

one thing I did wonder is whether the little bit of extra weight made for a little more stability handheld (like heavy barrels in target rifles) - I have a sense that I get a little movement when I press the shutter. Though that may be imagined and/or my poor technique.

mbecke Senior Member • Posts: 1,199
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

I don't know if I just got a bad copy, but my AF-P 70-300 fx lens (on a D850) was awful; not sharp at all.  It was promptly returned to the seller.  This is just a consumer lens and I was not impressed with its quality.  There are much better zoom lens choices; i.e., a used 70-200 vr2 for example.  Or just about anything else.

Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 15,476
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

Peter in Canberra wrote:

Tord S Eriksson wrote:

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

In Australia the FX version is very expensive and not worth it.

I leave it on my wife's D7500 where it gets little use.

Cheers

Graeme

For fun, I tried the DX version with a Kenko 1.4X TC on my old D600, and it worked like a dream. It is utterly sharp at 135mm (better than the Zeiss 135mm primes), according to Lenstip's review, but that was the only thing they really liked with the DX version, preferring the FX any day of the week.

But as it becomes an f/9.0 @420mm (with the TC on) you really need good light.

you had me excited til I read the last sentence

Yeah, sunny days only, or use (very) high ISO! DxO PhotoLab4  (deepPRIME recommended).

-- hide signature --

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon D3300 +23 more
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 15,476
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

Peter in Canberra wrote:

graemechapman wrote:

Peter,

I have both lenses and there is little difference optically but the FX version is heavier..

Cheers

Graeme

one thing I did wonder is whether the little bit of extra weight made for a little more stability handheld (like heavy barrels in target rifles) - I have a sense that I get a little movement when I press the shutter. Though that may be imagined and/or my poor technique.

Increased barrel-weight helps with lenses as well!

-- hide signature --

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon D3300 +23 more
GarysInSoCal
GarysInSoCal Contributing Member • Posts: 848
I own both lenses... here's the beef!
3

For it's compactness and extreme fast focus, the AF-P 70-300 DX is an amazing value and relatively sharp... BUT... it's big brother... the AF-S 70-300... is a step above it in sharpness... and it's VR seems to be alittle bit more effective. I would use the AF-S on the D7500 and the AF-P on the D3300.

If you happen to see a great deal on the D3500, definitely pick one of those up. The focus on the AF-P with that camera seems to be very slightly faster, and it's a lighter weight rig with more effective battery life... just my 2 cents!

Alana at the Select Models 'Junglehouse Photoshoot'.

 GarysInSoCal's gear list:GarysInSoCal's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR +8 more
Chen_Calvin New Member • Posts: 19
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
2

I have the AF-S 70-300mm VR FX. It's so sharp that I hardly used the AF-D 80-200mm/2.8 again since I owned it. I also heard a lot of good things about the DX version. However, to me, I think the 55-200mm VR II is even more appealing.

rich_cx139 Senior Member • Posts: 2,364
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

I have used both on a D500 ( and on various Nikon 1 V1's ) but not side by side since I sold the DX(VR) and got the FX version of the AF-P since I wanted to use it on my Z6 also.

I think both are very good optically but maybe the DX is a bit more prone to flare.

Apart from that - I shouldn't have sold the DX - it was dirt cheap ( £130 ) from Amazon when I got it and even though I sold it for a profit, prices are so high now. It is so light that it would be still handy to have around for travelling, especially on a V2 - even though you can't switch lens VR off on that body with the DX(VR) version.

There are plenty of more considered cross comparisons including Thom Hogan's.

[ btw, probably of no interest, but the FX doesn't like TC's on my Z6 - even with the utterly reliable Kenko pro 300, it just gave error messages. May have got it to work with a Tamron X14 TC1.4 but can't remember now ]

[ probably of even less interest, my previous 70-300 was the Tamron sp a030 which was optically excellent but not compatible with the Z/FTZ which is why I moved to the AF-P's ]

Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson Forum Pro • Posts: 15,476
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?
1

rich_cx139 wrote:

I have used both on a D500 ( and on various Nikon 1 V1's ) but not side by side since I sold the DX(VR) and got the FX version of the AF-P since I wanted to use it on my Z6 also.

I think both are very good optically but maybe the DX is a bit more prone to flare.

Apart from that - I shouldn't have sold the DX - it was dirt cheap ( £130 ) from Amazon when I got it and even though I sold it for a profit, prices are so high now. It is so light that it would be still handy to have around for travelling, especially on a V2 - even though you can't switch lens VR off on that body with the DX(VR) version.

There are plenty of more considered cross comparisons including Thom Hogan's.

[ btw, probably of no interest, but the FX doesn't like TC's on my Z6 - even with the utterly reliable Kenko pro 300, it just gave error messages. May have got it to work with a Tamron X14 TC1.4 but can't remember now ]

[ probably of even less interest, my previous 70-300 was the Tamron sp a030 which was optically excellent but not compatible with the Z/FTZ which is why I moved to the AF-P's ]

My AF-P 70-300 VR DX works great with the Kenko Pro 300, even on the D600! A surprise indeed!
But not on the N 1 cameras, as far as I can recall. Seems to be communication between the Kenko and the FT1 that is the problem, as my Sigma TC works great.

-- hide signature --

tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456

 Tord S Eriksson's gear list:Tord S Eriksson's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D600 Nikon D3300 +23 more
OP Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

thank you.

OP Peter in Canberra Senior Member • Posts: 1,124
Re: Nikon AF-P 70-300s - DX vs FX ?

super shot.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads