Difference between lenses

[Verse914]

Im looking for a 70-300 and found these two nikkor lenses.

Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6D ED $250
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1924

and this one

Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G $130
http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1928

I was just wondering what makes the D lense so much more? Is it that better? Im getting a 50mm 1.8 and probably one of the two listed above (unless you have some better recommendations).

Thanks!

[meriadoc]

just like the L lenses with canon.. D series normally has better quality glass, better build construction.

[hir0]

"g" version lenses are lenses that have no aperture ring. they are capable of flash metering and matrix metering.
"d" lenses are capable of flash metering and matrix metering.
"ed" designates lenses that have low dispersion elements that are supposed to help correct chromatic abberation.
read more about nikons designators here (http://www.bythom.com/lensacronyms.htm)
these two lenses are both made of plastic, they are both soft at 300mm and they both suffer from CA. the ED version has only one ED element that really doesn't do much to prevent chromatic abberations. if you look at nikons high end glass you'll find lenses with 4 or 5 ED elements. the ED version has a slightly better finish - i'm not sure if both are metal lens mounts or not - but that is definitely something to consider. both lenses are capable of delivering good images but they are both slow lenses (f4-5.6) which limits their use in bad lighting, and the autofocus is very very slow and hunting. the upside to them is zoom range, weight and cost.
honestly you should ask yourself this. am i going to want to replace this lens in the near future with something that is better? if you do plan to replace this lens, there really is no sense (to me) in buying the ed version of this lens. all of the 70-300 consumer zooms available for nikon mount are pretty similar as far as speed, autofocus, and optics. i wouldn't fret a whole lot about it if it's a temporary lens. if it's something you plan to use forever, then perhaps the ED version may be for you. it is built slightly better.
as for recommendations. i recommend that you save your pennies for good glass. the camera is only as good (optically) as the lens attached to it. do a lot of research before you buy. nikon has a good lens for just about every focal length. the range 70-300 is limited to consumer grade lenses, but you'll definitely get some use out of it.

[Verse914]

Thanks mariadoc and hir0

Very cool link Hir0. I couldnt find a link like that for some reason. I dont suppose you could recommend a better lense in this range (even a 70-200mm would do). Im looking for a good lense in this range, but also not something really expensive. Thanks for your help.

[hir0]

it really depends on your budget. what price range are we talkin?

[Verse914]

Something under $500

[meriadoc]

if you could afford a little extra, your best shot would be the sigma 70-200 2.8 retails anywhere from $600-800 normally.

course, if you went canon you could had their 70-200 f4L for around $550

[JerseyJay]

Aaron,

This is a decent lens. Nothing spectacular. If you are willing to save up and wait a little bit, I would prefer to get Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 or if you can find it AF 70-210mm f/4-5.6D (best inexpensive telephoto zoom - discontinued in 2000)

---------------

70-300mm G vs. ED

By Ken Rockwell

The only visible differences between the G and ED are:

1.) ED lens has metal mount, G has plastic. (also a slight difference in weight)
2.) ED has aperture ring, G does not

The similarities are:

1.) Same specs for number of lens groups and elements
2.) Same size
3.) Same AF speed and gearing
4.) Same close focus distance
5.) Same nice 9-blade diaphragm
6.) Looks like the same optics inside and identical movement of the lens groups while zooming and focussing

I will guess G is the same as the 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED AF lens. I doubt these lenses have different optics, although this G lens may have sloppier mechanics leading to poorer results.

Recommendations

If you are looking for a cheap zoom for light weight, give this a look. I can't see any reason to buy the so-called ED version over this except for the metal mount and compatibility with my manual focus cameras.

I doubt the this lens is any different between the ED and G versions. Remember that the ED version really seems to be made by Tamron and only one small internal element claims to be ED probably for marketing and promotional reasons, not any of the important front elements. I don't really consider that the "ED" moniker means anything on the ED version.

Of course the only thing that matters is photography, and I have not shot with this lens. Try it and see.

[hir0]

good suggestion by meriadoc, you might want to look into used lenses also, ibn just picked up a 100-300 sigma f4 used for $550 (retail is approx $800-900)
you may be able to pick up a 80-200 f2.8 non AF-S 2 touch for a good price. (not the push pull version)

[Ibn]

Yup, just recently picked up the Sigma 100-300 f/4 lens, which was a great deal. I've really grown to love it (still have to test it at F8 and beyond), and it's gotten me to think of spending some money on longer glass...

Also have the 70-210 f/4-5.6; just not the "D" version that Jay is referring to. Before I picked up the Sigma, I was using this lens and even though it isn't as fast as the D version, it's a great lens for the price (paid $140 for it). The D version of this lens is available pretty often on ebay and goes around the $300-350 range. I also borrowed a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 lens from a friend of mine and between these two, the 70-210 focuses faster and the pictures comes out sharper.

[Ibn]

Just saw this:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/183775

[hir0]

this lens is optically and mechanically good, but do understand, that this is a push pull lens. :) push pull lenses are slightly more prone to pulling dust in and out of the lens and/or body.

[Ibn]

True...also looking back at the post, it doesn't look like it's an AF lens either...

[hir0]

i think i can make out an "af" on the lens. it also appears to have an af limit switch.

[Ibn]

Oh, boy...think it's time to head home now. Enough spreadsheets for the day...

Same lens as this one on KR's site?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200.htm

[hir0]

no. the one on ken rockwell's site is a 2 touch version (2 rings, one for focus one for zoom) - the one on FM is a push pull zoom with just a focus ring. i would prefer the 2 touch version.

[JerseyJay]

The one of FM website is "garbage". Don't spend the money on this type of lens. Save up or look elsewhere.

[Ibn]

Figures. Wasn't thinking about picking the lens up. I'm actually saving up for either the 70-200 afs vr or a longer lens right now.

[Verse914]

Thanks everyone for your help. I was planning on ordering this lense with the 50mm 1.8D, but I decided to save a little more money and get a good lense. The 50mm was just ordered, so Ill do some more research (and save $$) for a good lense. Thanks for your suggestions and replies!