Help me decide between two Nikon Lenses

[Wildcats160]

I am a general purpose photographer. Although I wouldn't call myself a wildlife photographer, I like to take a camera out in the woods when hiking/hunting and just photograph whatever I see including animals. At the same time, my daughter is getting older, and I would like to be able to shoot her future sports games and things like that. I have been looking for a telephoto, and two of the lenses that I have had my eye out for were recently put up for sale locally.

The first is the Nikon 70-300G AF-S VR. The seller wants $250.

The other is the Nikon 80-400 F/4.5-5.6D ED VR (not the AF-S version). The seller wants $400.

From what I understand, the big benefit to the first is a faster autofocus, whereas the benefit to the second is more reach.

Has anyone out there used both (or either) and can offer a real-world perspective or recommendation for a wildlife/sports/landscape shooter?

 

[JoeW]

I'm a Nikon shooter. I have used both lens but I don't own either of them. I'm not going to go in to detail on why one lens is better than the other--Derrel is probably better at that and I didn't use either long enough to form a strong impression--especially compared to each other.

Depending upon what you're shooting in terms of wildlife, 400mm is the minimum distance you'd want. I have a 600mm that I use for wildlife. Of course, you have to be willing to lug something that big around when you go out hiking or hunting. Additionally, when shooting with a lens like that, you really need to plan on using a tripod.

Depending on the level of sports your daughter does (if it's youth soccer where you're on the sidelines vs. a HS sport where it's at night and you're in the stands), 200mm is probably fine but you'd want a wide-open aperture, partially for speed, partially b/c you may be shooting in low light (if it's a HS sport), and also to create bokeh with the narrow DoF.

 

[Derrel]

The 80-400 requires an in-body AF system, the 70-300 AF-S G has the AF motor in the lens. Neither are super-high-quality optically once the Megapixel level gets significantly above 12 MP. I shot thousands of shots with the 80-400 VR on the D2x and lower-rez cameras, and it's got a lot of reach, and works "okay" on the pro-level cameras with strong AF modules, like the D2x or D3x. Rhe 70-300 AF-S G is okay optically on 12MP, but shows some weaknesses on 24MP FX or 36MP FX...the issue is that, once the MP levels get hight on Full-frame Nikons these older lenses show some weird "video-y" effects...

I do NOT own any of the 16- or 24-MP DX Nikons, so I cannot comment on how these lenses shoot on 16 or 24-MP DX cameras.

You need the right camera to focus the 80-400 VR. I think the newer 70-300 AF-P VR might actually be the lens to look for, provided you have the right camera.

 

[Wildcats160]

Thanks for the responses. I'm shooting a D7100, for what it's worth.

@JoeW - When I say wildlife photography, I generally mean medium and large game within bow range. I generally don't have a hard time getting within 20 and 30 yards of an animal. Do you still think 400 (600 equivalent on a DX) wouldn't be enough?

@Derrel - Thanks. I am not familiar with the AF-P version. I have a har enough time keeping all the 70-300 offerings straight. Looks like I'm doing some more research.

 

[Derrel]

Thanks for the responses. I'm shooting a D7100, for what it's worth.

@JoeW - When I say wildlife photography, I generally mean medium and large game within bow range. I generally don't have a hard time getting within 20 and 30 yards of an animal. Do you still think 400 (600 equivalent on a DX) wouldn't be enough?

@Derrel - Thanks. I am not familiar with the AF-P version. I have a har enough time keeping all the 70-300 offerings straight. Looks like I'm doing some more research.

Check out Thom Hogan's Nikon D3400 review, where he specifically addresses the amazing performance and image quality of this new, 70-300 AF-P VR model. According to him, this is _THE BEST_ optically of all of the 70-300 lenses. The now 15 year-old 70-300 AF-S VR is now second tier on today's new, high-megapixel d-slrs. Despite the low price of the 70-300 AF-P VR, he says that it performs on the level of the big, expensive, pro-level tele zooms (albeit at smaller aperture values only), and that this is _the_ lens to get in this class; not the older, more-costly 70-300 AF-S G model. You are right; there have been a number of 70-300 lens models, and it can be difficult to keep them straight, mentally.