nikon d610 (Page 4): help them, don't patronize. The scene was a good snap shot. Not a photograph. Maybe you should consider moving on to a website where everyone is a liberal as you.

jim lumento Loc: Shelton, Ct

help them, don't patronize. The scene was a good snap shot. Not a photograph. Maybe you should consider moving on to a website where everyone is a liberal as you.

Straightshooter Loc: Edmonton AB

jim lumento wrote:

kiss my ass. is that better

Rules are rules and you still did not use quote reply
you dumb shit

jim lumento Loc: Shelton, Ct

perhaps you should send her your apology for lying to her. You are stifling her growth, creativity and understanding of what a photograph is suppose to say and do.

jim lumento Loc: Shelton, Ct

that is the reply quote that will always keep you in the loser column

NoSocks Loc: quonochontaug, rhode island

The price difference between the d610 and the d800 is not insignificant. You'll save a thou or more which goes a long way toward one of the holy trinity f2.8 lenses. Also, think about your hard disk space for the huge d800 files.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

NoSocks wrote:

The price difference between the d610 and the d800 is not insignificant. You'll save a thou or more which goes a long way toward one of the holy trinity f2.8 lenses. Also, think about your hard disk space for the huge d800 files.

A 2tb internal drive is less than $100, and D800 files are not THAT much larger than D610 files

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

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.

As far as the image quality is concerned, at this focal length and fstop there nothing to complain about. Camera and lens are fine.

Do you have anything taken at 300mm at F5.6?

I can assure you that you are correct - it is not as sharp as the 70-200. It may come close to the 70-200 at F2.8 in the center at 68mm at F8, there is no contest, between the two. It also doesn't cost $2400.

Gobuster Loc: South Florida

Gene51 wrote:

As far as the image quality is concerned, at this focal length and fstop there nothing to complain about. Camera and lens are fine.

Do you have anything taken at 300mm at F5.6?

I can assure you that you are correct - it is not as sharp as the 70-200. It may come close to the 70-200 at F2.8 in the center at 68mm at F8, there is no contest, between the two. It also doesn't cost $2400.

I looked and don't seem to have anything at 300mm and F5.6

:-). Knowing it's limitations, I've usually stopped down to F8 and used higher ISO when necessary! I'll have to try 300mm wide open and post the results. All in all, I love the 28-300 for it's versatility, and using it on a D600 that has excellent high ISO performance, allows me to shoot in the "sweet spot" most of the time. The price/performance value is very good, but I'll be first to agree the optics are not to the same standard as the 70-200mm F2.8. I have made 20 x 30" and 24 x 36" prints from the 28-300; they look very good, especially when applying lens corrections and sharpening in Lightroom.