Advice on Nikon 28-300mm or similar
Feb 21, 2020 21:01:50 #
I'm thinking about a Nikkor 28-300 as a single lens for general travel and everyday use, snapshots etc - a really expensive lens cap, if you like! That's a bit too flippant - it would be more accurate to say that I'm thinking of it as a decent all-round lens, an acceptable compromise that should do most things reasonably.
The advantages are light weight & wide range. And inexpensive. The downside is OK to less-than-superlative performance especially for a D850.
Before you reply, a couple of points:
• I have (a very few) both wider angle and/or faster primes (85/1.4 is a favorite)
• I have a longer zoom (200-500) for special purposes such as wildlife and motorsports
• I specifically don't want an 80-200 2.8 as I think it is just too big, too heavy and too expensive, plus I've always found with whatever-to-200 zooms that 200 isn't enough
• Not that bothered by the small aperture as I can always crank up the ISO.
• Strictly amateur use.
Any thoughts or suggestions? Any other lens or third party manufacturers with similar lens that are worth thinking about?
The advantages are light weight & wide range. And inexpensive. The downside is OK to less-than-superlative performance especially for a D850.
Before you reply, a couple of points:
• I have (a very few) both wider angle and/or faster primes (85/1.4 is a favorite)
• I have a longer zoom (200-500) for special purposes such as wildlife and motorsports
• I specifically don't want an 80-200 2.8 as I think it is just too big, too heavy and too expensive, plus I've always found with whatever-to-200 zooms that 200 isn't enough
• Not that bothered by the small aperture as I can always crank up the ISO.
• Strictly amateur use.
Any thoughts or suggestions? Any other lens or third party manufacturers with similar lens that are worth thinking about?
Feb 21, 2020 21:10:57 #
alexol wrote:
I'm thinking about a Nikkor 28-300 as a single len... (show quote)
I too have fast glass, but my main vacation walk around lens is my 18-300. It was the right choice for me to stop carrying the fast lenses unless I really needed that speed. With my Nikon lens it is slightly less sharp at 16 but looks great by 19 or 20. No problems at the long end.
...Cam
Feb 21, 2020 23:16:44 #
alexol wrote:
I'm thinking about a Nikkor 28-300 as a single len... (show quote)
I prefer the shorter range of 28-200 - better optics, smaller/lighter, crop your way to 300 and use pixel enlargement if needed - that is what I do.
.
Feb 21, 2020 23:50:51 #
alexol wrote:
I'm thinking about a Nikkor 28-300 as a single len... (show quote)
If you have a D850, stick to Nikon's recommended list of lenses for that camera. The 28-300 is not on the list - for good reason. It isn't a good lens, especially past 150mm. Others who have it will swear by it, but there is a likelihood that this might be their first 300mm lens. I am not impressed by its performance even on a D800 - you will be less impressed if you are on a D850. However, if you don't mind tossing $1000 at a mediocre lens (at best), and trading image quality for convenience, who am I to try and convince you otherwise. A 70-200mm F2.8 with a 1.4X will far exceed the performance of a 28-300.
In my case, I'd rather carry around a slightly heavier lens - the 70-200 FL is 5.1 lbs with camera, vs 3.4 lbs with the 28-300 - than to regret not having the better lens for certain images. However, I will admit that not everyone prioritizes image quality over convenience. My walk around lens for birding is a Sigma Sport 150-600, which weighs 8.5 lbs with camera, and I use it hand held, and I don't find it limiting.
Feb 22, 2020 01:25:26 #
While I appreciate the effort of a reply - and thank you for your thoughts - I wish you'd read my original post a little more thoroughly, in which I specifically addressed the 70-200/2.8 and mentioned my 200-500.
What I read says the 28-300 is better than mediocre, but certainly not "the best" - but it does appear that there is no other single lens that does the same job.
I was really hoping for replies from people to say either "I've got the lens (and ideally same body) and I'm ok with it" or " I had one and hated because X, Y & Z".
What I read says the 28-300 is better than mediocre, but certainly not "the best" - but it does appear that there is no other single lens that does the same job.
I was really hoping for replies from people to say either "I've got the lens (and ideally same body) and I'm ok with it" or " I had one and hated because X, Y & Z".
Feb 22, 2020 01:25:27 #
Feb 22, 2020 01:30:41 #
imagemeister wrote:
I prefer the shorter range of 28-200 - better optics, smaller/lighter, crop your way to 300 and use pixel enlargement if needed - that is what I do.
.
.
Not meaning to be a smart-@$$ but unless I've missed something, that 28-200 isn't a recent FX is it? The only one I find dates from about 2003 and I assumed (quite possibly wrongly) that lens technology had moved on since then.
Feb 22, 2020 04:19:20 #
Pistnbroke
Loc: UK
I have used two of these over the years on D850 and D810 and taken tens of thousands of wedding photos with them . You must get the fine focus adjust right ..both mine were +15 and if you shoot JPEG then the sharpness to +9 ( that applies to all lenses and all Nikon cameras) If you go my website www.1and1photography.co.uk go the the client area ( use obama@hotmail.com to gain access) and you have 40,000 photos from this lens and the Samyang 14mm..all large basic
Feb 22, 2020 05:40:03 #
I'm personally quite fond of the 28-300 focal length. I own two 28-300 lenses, the Nikkor that you are asking about and the Canon L series 28-300. I use my Nikkor 28-300 on my D500 and D7200 and I use it quite often, both outdoors and indoors. It is a very convenient lens but you really have to know what you are doing or you may not be happy with the results. No, it's not the sharpest lens but it is sharp enough.
I'm sure there will be plenty of responders telling you not to get this lens but I believe you will find it quite useful as a utility lens. Bottom line, it's not a great lens but it is a good lens...
I'm sure there will be plenty of responders telling you not to get this lens but I believe you will find it quite useful as a utility lens. Bottom line, it's not a great lens but it is a good lens...
Feb 22, 2020 06:22:23 #
Feb 22, 2020 06:22:25 #
Yes, the 28-300 is a good general purpose lens, given that you seem to have your specialty needs covered and prefer (as I do) the reach of a 300mm over 200mm. I have this lens and use it for general outings. I have my 200-500 for birds and an 80-200 and other fast primes for concerts, using a D500 and D810.
But one other thought. If portability is your goal, what about just getting a travel camera and leaving the D850 at home? Many people like the high quality point and shoots like the Sony RX100. Personally, I use a D3400 for outings where larger rigs are not needed or are inappropriate. Plus, then we can have the same discussion about the 18-300 DX lens (which I also have and use as a general purpose lens). I have taken some stunning photos with this combination, one of which is on my wall.
Actually, if I was looking today, i would also consider the Z50 as a portable option.
Good shooting!
But one other thought. If portability is your goal, what about just getting a travel camera and leaving the D850 at home? Many people like the high quality point and shoots like the Sony RX100. Personally, I use a D3400 for outings where larger rigs are not needed or are inappropriate. Plus, then we can have the same discussion about the 18-300 DX lens (which I also have and use as a general purpose lens). I have taken some stunning photos with this combination, one of which is on my wall.
Actually, if I was looking today, i would also consider the Z50 as a portable option.
Good shooting!
Feb 22, 2020 06:40:43 #
Feb 22, 2020 06:59:11 #
SeaBrat
Loc: St Petersburg, FL
When I travel by air I use the 28-300 lens on my Z6 and the 24-70s f4 for times when I want to reduce the size, weight. The 28-300 is convenient and works well when I need the reach. If I need smaller, I use a RX-100 IV.
Feb 22, 2020 07:06:46 #
I have the 28-300 and love it I'm attaching 2 photos 1 is the shot taken with a D600 at 300mm and a crop from it !
Feb 22, 2020 07:11:48 #
It is possible that those who malign the 28-300 have a technique problem. The photos I've seen on Ken Rockwell's review of this lens leave nothing to be desired in the sharpness/color dept.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.