24-120 or 28-300
Oct 29, 2014 17:52:44 #
New to the forum, really enjoyed reading all the topics.
I have just bought a Nikon d610, and am looking for a lens to travel with. We go to out of the way places and have to travel light because of weight allowances.
My old camera is a d90 and I really liked the 18-200 mm lens for traveling, I thought I would buy the 28-300 but have been seeing a lot of so-so reviews when researching, apparently soft from 200-300.
The 24-120 seems to have good reviews, but doesn't have the reach of the other lens.
I also like the fact it is f4 all the way through the range.
Could I get some opinions from anyone who has tried both and the pros and cons of each.
Thanks!
I have just bought a Nikon d610, and am looking for a lens to travel with. We go to out of the way places and have to travel light because of weight allowances.
My old camera is a d90 and I really liked the 18-200 mm lens for traveling, I thought I would buy the 28-300 but have been seeing a lot of so-so reviews when researching, apparently soft from 200-300.
The 24-120 seems to have good reviews, but doesn't have the reach of the other lens.
I also like the fact it is f4 all the way through the range.
Could I get some opinions from anyone who has tried both and the pros and cons of each.
Thanks!
Oct 29, 2014 18:30:00 #
jconan wrote:
....I have just bought a Nikon d610, .... have to travel light because of weight allowances.
... have been seeing a lot of so-so reviews when researching, apparently soft from 200-300....The 24-120 seems to have good reviews, but doesn't have the reach of the other lens...I also like the fact it is f4 all the way through the range.
Could I get some opinions from anyone who has tried both and the pros and cons of each.
Thanks!
... have been seeing a lot of so-so reviews when researching, apparently soft from 200-300....The 24-120 seems to have good reviews, but doesn't have the reach of the other lens...I also like the fact it is f4 all the way through the range.
Could I get some opinions from anyone who has tried both and the pros and cons of each.
Thanks!
i had the 28-300, it was so soft i took it back and got A 70-200 which works fine.
i have a 24-120 for soft portraits and range but switch to the 24-70 for sharp photos and speed.
Oct 29, 2014 18:30:53 #
jconan wrote:
New to the forum, really enjoyed reading all the t... (show quote)
It depends what you enjoy shooting. I don't find the 28-300 soft at all. Is it as sharp as a prime for whatever focal length you choose? No. And it isn't going to be. None of the zooms in the same price range are.
The 28-300 offers a great range for the buck. Here are a few samples. Good for a carry around lens. Wider range than the 24-120.
The 28-300 is more compact and versatile for travel than the 70-200 or 70-300, for the telephoto reach and you won't have the wide angle with those either. Something I find very useful when traveling.
Oct 29, 2014 19:04:46 #
Thanks oldtigger,
Did you find it was soft at the 200-300 range or all the way through?
Did you find it was soft at the 200-300 range or all the way through?
Oct 29, 2014 19:06:42 #
Bozsik wrote:
It depends what you enjoy shooting. I don't find t... (show quote)
Thanks Bozsik,
Photos look great! I would really like the range of the 28-300 for travelling, wouldn't have to take anything else.
Oct 29, 2014 19:20:04 #
jconan wrote:
Thanks oldtigger,...Did you find it was soft at the 200-300 range or all the way through?
softer at 250-300.
Oct 29, 2014 20:28:03 #
jconan wrote:
Thanks Bozsik,
Photos look great! I would really like the range of the 28-300 for travelling, wouldn't have to take anything else.
Photos look great! I would really like the range of the 28-300 for travelling, wouldn't have to take anything else.
I carry this lens often when I want to travel light. The sampling provides you an opportunity to view the images at both ends of the zoom.
For the focal lengths offered, it is a great lens.
Oct 30, 2014 05:43:49 #
I use a D600, have the sigma 24-105 f/4, exceptional lens which is very sharp even wide open, but doesn't have the range for every situation. I recently purchased the new Tamron 28-300, in part because there are many times I'd just like to take a range of shots without carrying so much gear, weight. The results I've gotten with the Tamron are surprisingly good, but I use it where it's strengths are, 200-300 f/11- f/16, 28-70 f/5.6-8, 70-200 f/8 to f/11. It I try to use the widest possible aperture in every situation the results just aren't as good. Or said another way, the 28-300 is a lens that will require a lot of light to yield the best results. I had a Nikon 28-300 when I first bought my D600 and was very disappointed in it and sold it and it also will give very good results when used where it's the strongest. Fortunately I'm beginning to learn to give more thought to what I'm doing and what I'm using to do it with. The D610 is an excellent camera and both lenses you mentioned can give you excellent results.
jconan wrote:
New to the forum, really enjoyed reading all the t... (show quote)
Oct 30, 2014 07:05:56 #
Oct 30, 2014 07:13:08 #
Bozsik wrote "It depends what you enjoy shooting. I don't find the 28-300 soft at all. Is it as sharp as a prime for whatever focal length you choose? No. And it isn't going to be. None of the zooms in the same price range are.
The 28-300 offers a great range for the buck. Here are a few samples. Good for a carry around lens. Wider range than the 24-120.
The 28-300 is more compact and versatile for travel than the 70-200 or 70-300, for the telephoto reach and you won't have the wide angle with those either. Something I find very useful when traveling."
I will simply add for the range it covers it is a good lens for your stated purpose and is the reason I have one. If you can carry only one lens this one is as good as it gets. Maybe I have a great copy but I have to say mine is quite impressive. ;)
The 28-300 offers a great range for the buck. Here are a few samples. Good for a carry around lens. Wider range than the 24-120.
The 28-300 is more compact and versatile for travel than the 70-200 or 70-300, for the telephoto reach and you won't have the wide angle with those either. Something I find very useful when traveling."
I will simply add for the range it covers it is a good lens for your stated purpose and is the reason I have one. If you can carry only one lens this one is as good as it gets. Maybe I have a great copy but I have to say mine is quite impressive. ;)
Oct 30, 2014 08:47:55 #
Oct 30, 2014 09:10:14 #
jconan wrote:
New to the forum, really enjoyed reading all the t... (show quote)
I've tried three copies of the 28-300, after a decent experience with the 18-200 on my D200, D300s, and was hoping for something comparable. Sadly, it wasn't. Aside from the correctable aberration (pincushion distortion, CA, complex distortion), the lens really falls short at 300mm, it would have been wiser to limit the lens to 200mm where it is acceptable, but not terrific. At all focal lengths, and pretty much at all apertures, the corners and edges are just plain unacceptable. Frankly, this lens on a cropped camera is functional, but not on a high mp FX camera. The 24-120 is a bit better, but not nearly in the same class as their 24-70. If you want to rethink this another way, perhaps get the 24-70 F2.8 and an older used 70-210 F4 to F5.6. The 70-210 is a AF-D which requires a focus drive in the camera body, but you have that. And the lens is very sharp, corner to corner, even when used wide open. The best part, you can usually find them used for about $125-$175.
http://www.azkportraits.co.uk/blog/gear-review-nikon-nikkor-70-210-f4-56d
It's a great travel lens for a full frame camera.
Oct 30, 2014 09:20:29 #
Bozsik wrote:
It depends what you enjoy shooting. I don't find t... (show quote)
I too am looking at this lens - these are nice photos but without the EXIF data, it is not possible to really evaluate this lens.
Can you please repost with the EXIF data?
Thank you,
Oct 30, 2014 10:37:57 #
Gene51 wrote:
I've tried three copies of the 28-300, after a dec... (show quote)
Thanks Gene51,
I was originally thinking of the 24-70 but it didn't have quite the range I wanted and the price was a little bit more than I wanted to spend at the moment. Is the 70-210 a heavy lens?
Oct 30, 2014 10:40:59 #
UncleBuck wrote:
I use a D600, have the sigma 24-105 f/4, exception... (show quote)
Thanks UncleBuck,
I have not researched the Tamron and Sigma lenses but have heard you get good value for the money, that was the next place I was going to look.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.