SteveR wrote:
Nikon 28-300 will cover your needs with no need to change lenses.
Steve, the 28-300 is a handy range for
full frame.
I've use it for golf tournaments and it works great.
Btu...the OP has a
DX-sensored camera.
Turk6482 wrote:
Hello all,..
I have a Nikon D7200 and 2 kits lens but was looking to upgrade to better lens for the trip.
On a DX body, the 28mm is a 42mm "ff equivalent".
That's not really even a wide angle.
Turk:
Which kit lenses do you have?
When I travel, I take my APS-C Fuji X-E2 and the 18-55...and sometimes the 14.
I don't shoot wildlife so the longer end of the 18-400 would never get used.
That end of the focal range on most superzooms is notoriously soft anyway.
With their smaller maximum apertures, they aren't real great a low light either.
My 18-55 is a f/2.8~4. The 14 is a 2.8.
Both are good for (church) interiors and evening photography.
Too bad Nikon didn't update the 17-55 2.8 DX with VR.
It's a constant maximum 2.8 aperture through the range and sharp.
It was a pro lens made for DX sensors.
(Nikon Didn't make full-frame bodies when that came out.)
I still use mine on the D300s.
It is a bit big and heavy, but I prefer to think of the weight as more stable.
Lack of VR in shorter focal lengths isn't as big a deal as with longer lenses.
Both
Sigma and Tamron have a 17-50 2.8 with stabilization that some here seem to like.
Never used either, but I have a couple of other Sigma lenses I've been impressed with.