nikon d610
Apr 21, 2014 17:08:59 #
larryim
Loc: Ohio
shutterbob wrote:
For the extra $200, you are in the neighborhood where you can find a very clean used 24-70, which will put them both to shame in any aspect. Plus you get f2.8. I'm not bragging about how good the IQ is with the 28-300, but it will do a good job at taking the place of several lenses until the $$$ appear for more/better lenses.
I appreciate Gene51's opinion on this and do not for a minute doubt his experiences with the 28-300. I also appreciate Shutterbob's comment above. What I really hope is that others with a 610 and experience with the 28-300 will weigh in with their opinions as well. Perhaps, I should start another thread, since this one is more about the 610 and not so much about it and the 28-300.
Apr 21, 2014 17:41:31 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
larryim wrote:
I appreciate Gene51's opinion on this and do not for a minute doubt his experiences with the 28-300. I also appreciate Shutterbob's comment above. What I really hope is that others with a 610 and experience with the 28-300 will weigh in with their opinions as well. Perhaps, I should start another thread, since this one is more about the 610 and not so much about it and the 28-300.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Apr 21, 2014 18:19:17 #
shutterbob wrote:
For the extra $200, you are in the neighborhood where you can find a very clean used 24-70, which will put them both to shame in any aspect. Plus you get f2.8. I'm not bragging about how good the IQ is with the 28-300, but it will do a good job at taking the place of several lenses until the $$$ appear for more/better lenses.
But now you are $300-400 over the cost of a new 28-300. There is a buy it now on ebay right now for $800, which I still think is overpriced for what you get. $600-700 would be more appropriate, but that is hard to find. Best to steer clear of this and consider some of the alternatives.
Apr 21, 2014 19:09:12 #
shutterbob wrote:
I disagree about the 28-300.If you are on a budget like most of us, it is a great all purpose lens. I have a 610, and do most of my shooting with the Nikon 24-70 attached. I also have the 70-200 and 16-35. But there are times when I don't want (or am able) to pack all of my gear around so the 28-300 comes with me. It can give you some pretty good shots until you can afford more lenses, and you can find great used ones for well under $1,000.
I agree that the 28-300 is a great travel lens. I own the Holy Trinity and several pro prime lens, but I still use the 28-300 at times that I don't want to lug around the bigger, heavier pro lenses. I don't want to carry a 70-200 around Disney World. The 28-300 is not a pro lens, but it serves very well on a full frame camera like the 610. I use it on both my 700 and 800E and the results are totally acceptable for my amateur, but discerning needs. The 28-300 will complement a 610 well.
Apr 21, 2014 19:11:39 #
Apr 21, 2014 20:53:40 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
I agree that the 28-300 is a great travel lens. I own the Holy Trinity and several pro prime lens, but I still use the 28-300 at times that I don't want to lug around the bigger, heavier pro lenses. I don't want to carry a 70-200 around Disney World. The 28-300 is not a pro lens, but it serves very well on a full frame camera like the 610. I use it on both my 700 and 800E and the results are totally acceptable for my amateur, but discerning needs. The 28-300 will complement a 610 well.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Apr 21, 2014 21:05:09 #
DavidPine
Loc: Fredericksburg, TX
No, that's not better. If you can't control your emotions you might be better off somewhere else. People here do speak in a direct manner and it is not personal. Most everyone here does everything they can to help the inexperienced photographers. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge and experience on UHH and the Hogs are willing to share it with you. You owe and apology to Ametha, who happens to know more about cameras and lenses than most here. Calm down or move on. Good luck.
jim lumento wrote:
kiss my ass. is that better
Apr 21, 2014 21:27:21 #
Chris Knight
Loc: Ayden, nc
jim lumento wrote:
kiss my ass. is that better
Jim...Jim...Jim...you show your ignorance and arrogance so well. What do you want from this site?
Apr 21, 2014 21:52:58 #
DavidPine wrote:
No, that's not better. If you can't control your emotions you might be better off somewhere else. People here do speak in a direct manner and it is not personal. Most everyone here does everything they can to help the inexperienced photographers. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge and experience on UHH and the Hogs are willing to share it with you. You owe and apology to Ametha, who happens to know more about cameras and lenses than most here. Calm down or move on. Good luck.
Well said, David.
Apr 21, 2014 22:24:50 #
DVZ
Loc: Littleton CO
I own a D300, D5100 and recently bought a D600. The D600 does have the best image quality especially in low light, but in good light I've printed very nice 18" x 24" and larger prints with the 12 megpx D300. When I got the D600 I spent $4000 for the 24-70 and 70-200 and I'm not willing to carry these lens when flying. They are mondo, great glass but heavy. When I'm flying I'll carry one of my DX bodies with the lighter DX lenses. The D5100 is small and light and has great image quality. It is a little frustrating to use after using the D300 & D600 as far as ergonomics and control goes but I'm totally satisfied with it's image quality. You can achieve a shallower depth of field with an FX format, which when you want it it's great, when you don't you have to work around it. It's a lot of money to step up if you don't have the FX lenses. Don't go in debt to do it.
Apr 21, 2014 22:34:42 #
DVZ
Loc: Littleton CO
I own a D300, D5100 and recently bought a D600. The D600 does have the best image quality especially in low light, but in good light I've printed very nice 18" x 24" and larger prints with the 12 megpx D300. When I got the D600 I spent $4000 for the 24-70 and 70-200 and I'm not willing to carry these lens when flying. They are mondo, great glass but heavy. When I'm flying I'll carry one of my DX bodies with the lighter DX lenses. The D5100 is small and light and has great image quality. It is a little frustrating to use after using the D300 & D600 as far as ergonomics and control goes but I'm totally satisfied with it's image quality. You can achieve a shallower depth of field with an FX format, which when you want it it's great, when you don't you have to work around it. It's a lot of money to step up if you don't have the FX lenses. Don't go in debt to do it.
Apr 21, 2014 22:56:34 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
I agree that the 28-300 is a great travel lens. I own the Holy Trinity and several pro prime lens, but I still use the 28-300 at times that I don't want to lug around the bigger, heavier pro lenses. I don't want to carry a 70-200 around Disney World. The 28-300 is not a pro lens, but it serves very well on a full frame camera like the 610. I use it on both my 700 and 800E and the results are totally acceptable for my amateur, but discerning needs. The 28-300 will complement a 610 well.
I have a D600 and 28-300 lens. I'm quite pleased with it's performance. Attached is an example of what I'm getting from the lens/camera combo, I just posted in another thread. This shot was made from a rocking, moving Circle line boat and illustrates just how well the VR works. Ok, maybe it's not as sharp as a 70-200, but please download and let me know what you think.
Apr 21, 2014 23:01:26 #
DavidPine
Loc: Fredericksburg, TX
Great picture. Did you do a little HDR work on it?
Gobuster wrote:
I have a D600 and 28-300 lens. I'm quite pleased with it's performance. Attached is an example of what I'm getting from the lens/camera combo, I just posted in another thread. This shot was made from a rocking, moving Circle line boat and illustrates just how well the VR works. Ok, maybe it's not as sharp as a 70-200, but please download and let me know what you think.
Apr 21, 2014 23:20:29 #
DavidPine wrote:
Great picture. Did you do a little HDR work on it?
I did PP in Lightroom 5. Highlights down, shadows up, some added clarity, tad of vibrance and saturation, lens correction profile applied, decreased blue luminance. This is a single RAW photo not HDR, but I guess the PP went in that direction. I also did a 3 shot bracket and made an HDR fusion in Photomatix. That version has more "pop" as you can see below.
May 22, 2014 12:57:00 #
jim lumento
Loc: Shelton, Ct
No! Buy the D800. Granted the picture on the 610 is full frame but the quality difference for the money is not there. Buy the D800 or stay with the D5200. You can also look at improving the quality of your lenses. Any Nano Crystal lenses will make a significant improvement.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.