New Nikon lens or not...f stop question....

[senecabeach]

I have a Nikon D 80 camera and one of my lenses is an AF-S DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR and is about 6" long. I also have an 18-135 f3.5 that I use as my all around lens.

Am looking at an AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VRII which is about 4" long.

Since I'm not getting any younger...
...Wondering if the f1.0 less then my 70-300mm and lighter/shorter in weight is worth considering replacing both my 2 lenses with this one???

Of course idealy...Looking for Nikon to make a 2.8 lighter & shorter..

Your thoughts...Please??
What about the quality of this newest lens??
Or IS it the newest or should I wait...HELP!!

 

[PythonFan888]

Hi Carol!

I checked out the lenses you mentioned on DxOMark. They tested the three on a D90 (not a D80) and the results were pretty close. You may lose just a little bit of sharpness and have more CA with the 18-300.

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D90___970_439_207_439_262_439

 

[havoc315]

I have a Nikon D 80 camera and one of my lenses is an AF-S DX NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR and is about 6" long. I also have an 18-135 f3.5 that I use as my all around lens.

Am looking at an AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VRII which is about 4" long.

Since I'm not getting any younger...
...Wondering if the f1.0 less then my 70-300mm and lighter/shorter in weight is worth considering replacing both my 2 lenses with this one???

Of course idealy...Looking for Nikon to make a 2.8 lighter & shorter..

Your thoughts...Please??
What about the quality of this newest lens??
Or IS it the newest or should I wait...HELP!!

While the 18-300 may be smaller than your 70-300, it will be bigger and heavier than your 18-135. So how often do you keep the 70-300 mounted? How often will you be carrying less weight, or will you actually be carrying more weight more often?

You will be sacrificing quality by switching to a super-zoom. How much quality, I can't tell you. I don't know the specifics of these lenses. The convenience gained may be worth it to you.

 

[hakepb]

I don't think you are gaining anything in aperature vs the 70-300 since the 18-300 stops down to f/5.3 at 50mm (and continues at f/5.6 from 105-300) which means it would be a smaller aperature at 70mm

http://m.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon-af-s-18-300mm-3p5-5p6-vr/2
Also pay attention to the 2nd Test Results section. The 18-300 is not very sharp at 300mm

I've never heard of the 18-300 being small or lightweight for a superzoom

The 18-300mm is distinctly supersized compared to other DX-format superzooms, and indeed contrives to be larger and heavier than the full frame AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR.

But I do not think any other lens has that much reach, if you really hate switching lenses. If size/weight is an issue for you, you may prefer a shorter 18-200 as an everyday lens and switching to the 70-300 on the few occasions you need the extra reach.

If you want better image quality, most photographers stay away from superzoom lenses as their optics are compromised compared to lenses covering shorter ranges.

Also pay attention to the size the 18-300 starts at a shorter 4.7" but extends to 8.1" at full telephoto.

 

[wiigirl]

Hi Carol!

I checked out the lenses you mentioned on DxOMark. They tested the three on a D90 (not a D80) and the results were pretty close. You may lose just a little bit of sharpness and have more CA with the 18-300.

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D90___970_439_207_439_262_439

 

[photo_chick]

I don't think you are gaining anything in aperature vs the 70-300 since the 18-300 stops down to f/5.3 at 50mm (and continues at f/5.6 from 105-300) which means it would be a smaller aperature at 70mm

This is an excellent point and one many overlook. You have to look at what that aperture is at different focal lengths.

 

[senecabeach]

Many THANKS to ALL of you for the thoughts.
It seems I certainly have much homework to do before I decide to take this plunge !!!

THANKS ALL !!!