nikon 70 -300mm lens

[tclune]

Originally Posted by nitti48

OK when I use the lens simulator..My d5100 is DX...could u explain the diff between DX and FX in the lens I assume..Thanks

If you have an FX camera, you have the option of setting it to just take DX-cropped images. This is used sometimes to take photos using DX lenses without having to contend with the vigneting. BTW, on reflection, if you are happy with the photos you're getting from the 18-200 I'm not sure that a 70-300 will buy you that much. You could get that Tamron 18-270 if you wanted a little more reach with no more IQ. You could probably pretty much swap the Tamron for the Nikon, so it might be a no-cost option. SLRGear reviews it favorably (for what these lenses are) here: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1217/cat/23 FWIW

[Bob Nichol]

The camera body is either DX or FX. FX bodies , such as the D3 series or the D700, have a sensor that is 24mm by 36mm. The rest of the DSLR line are DX bodies with a 16mm by 24mm sensor.

A particular lens can be DX or FX. An FX lens can be used on any body. A DX lens should only be used on a DX body otherwise the image will be missing the corners.

FX bodies may switch to DX mode with a DX lens but with reduced megapixels.

[nitti48]

OK I have the d5100 a DX body..Still alittle confused..I saw this lens

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR Nikkor Zoom Lens and





Nikon - AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR Zoom

The second is like $200 cheaper...Which is the better lens..Does it have to do with the Field of View?? The first lens is fx..that fits with the D5100?? I just want to be right when I purchase a lens at these higher prices..I am a newbie and amateur and do appreciate all your insight into my questions

[TCav]

"Focal length" is a physical property of a lens, and doesn"t change with the body it's mounted on. What does change with the body is the angle of view. Bodies with wider sensors ('FX' or 'Full Frame') have wider angles of view than bodies with smaller sensors ('DX' or 'APS-C'). Also, some lenses are designed exclusively for use with smaller sensors, and project an image that's not large enough to cover the larger 'FX' sensor. Generally, these are wide angle lenses, but some telephoto lenses fall into this category as well. Thus, lenses that are designed for 'FX' sensors will fit 'DX' bodies, but 'DX' lenses are not generally appropriate for 'FX' bodies.

Almost without exception, more expensive lenses are better than less expensive lenses. Such is the case with the two lenses you mentioned in your last post. The Nikon 70-300 is sharper, and has less vignetting and distortion than the Nikon 55-300. It also costs 50% more.

[nitti48]

OK I made up my mind after doing alittle more research and going to a camera store and asking questions..They were very helpful also as was everyone here..I have decided to buy a Tamron AF 70-300 f4-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD For Nikon at $399..I being an amateur think it will be hopefully a good fit..Anyone can give opinions good or bad..Please do

[TCav]

The Tamron is a good choice. It's stabilized. It's better than the Nikon 55-300 but not as good as the Nikon 70-300, as its price would indicate.

Good luck with it.

[Franko170]

Interesting letter to the editor in a recent Pop Photo suggests that while the 55-300 is not as rugged and has problems with polarizing filters; as far as image quality, Pop Photo believes the Nikon 55-300 may be a bit sharper than the Nikon 70-300. They call the 55-300 a 'steal.'