Does anyone know about 75-300/4.5-5.6 and 70-300/4.5-5.6 lens? Does any of the lenses has macro capability? There performance at the long and short end etc.

I have looked into nikon website and I want to know from people who have either used any or both of the lenses. Also, I know the difference of micro/macro in Nikon/Canon world.

Thanks in advance to respondents.

-- Tapan Mallik (tmallik@supplychain.com), November 25, 1998

Answers

Surprised you haven't gotten more comments on these lenses.

I own the 75-300 lens which I value highly. It is very sharp and convenient to use on a tripod, and will focus down to 5 feet throughout its zoom range.

It makes a great macro lens when one uses the Nikkor 5T and 6T close-up diopters with it. One gets generous working room. I know at least one pro nature photographer who makes all his close-ups of flowers with this set-up.

The new 70-300 has gotten lots of praise for sharpness and lightness, although it has also gotten some negative assessments of its sharpness. David Reuther, who tests all Nikkor lenses for rec.photo, doesn't think too highly of this lens.

I don't know who to believe in that regard.

When it first came out it was suspected by many of being a repackaged Tamron.

I probably will not get one because I use my 75-300 chiefly for close-up work. The tripod mount on this lens makes shooting close-ups easier because it is so easy to switch from a horizontal to a vertical composition.

The 70-300 does not have a tripod mount, which means that to switch formats I would have to flop the camera body over on its side in the tripod head, which is not as stable a position as one can get using a lens with a tripod mount.

The 75-300 is long and a bit cumbersome to carry around; the 70-300 would probably be a better walk-around lens because it is shorter and lighter. But shooting hand-held at 300 mm is a challenge with a moderately slow lens like this one -- f 5.6 at 300 mm. Make sure you use fast film if you try this.

But with every lens there are tradeoffs. Since I've got the 75-300 I plan to stick with it. If I didn't have it I'd look seriously at the 70-300.

-- John Wall (john_wall@ncsu.edu), December 01, 1998.