cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

Thank you, MT.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

Thanks for your reply, GC.

cogerox Loc: Northern Cal

Thanks, Wm.

traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.

That is my walk around lens! On my D610 90% of the time. The rest of the time either my 150-600, 24-70, 70-200 is on the camera.

You won't go wrong taking that lens.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I have the 28-300 and like it. I use it a lot. It's really convenient to have an all-purpose lens that covers that wide a range.

It's true that the 28-300 is not as sharp as some other lenses, such as the 24-70/70-200, and similar. However, I find it sharp enough for general purpose work, which includes personal shots (family, vacations, casual shots). When I need the highest IQ I use the 24-70 or 70-200, but I'm not obsessed with sharpness. I don't print anything larger than 8.5 x 11. And my largest monitor is 22" (something like 2100 pixels wide) so it's rare that I see any unsharp effects on my shots unless I crop a lot.

It comes down to whether you always want the highest IQ possible all the time (and are willing to pay for it) or whether you can afford to make some compromises for convenience. IMHO the 28-300 makes some compromises in IQ but they're small and it takes me some effort to spot them.

If you sell your images, get the best lenses you can. If you just show them to friends and family, get this lens.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

For a trip like that, carrying two or three , or more lenses would seem very practical to me!!

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Roger, I use a 18-200 as go to lens on my D800. I trust ken rockwells reviews.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

This is a good logical question - BUT - you miss the point of his wanting just wanting one lens - not having to switch lens between shots every very once in a while.
Myself what I do to solve that problem is I use a dual camera harness with 2 canon rebels - one with a 18-55 and the other with a 100-300 and the majority of my shots are with the 18-55 BUT every once in a while up comes the camera with the long lens.

Quixdraw Loc: x

I have both the 28-300 and 24-120. Both are good, but I feel the 24 - 120 is a more flexible lens. If I were taking one lens in a U.S. trip, it would be that or the 24-85. Most of the wildlife I do is here at home, and that is when the 28-300 or 80-400 and longer come into play. If you want the extra reach, the 28-300 has a bit more. If I took that on a trip as primary lens, I'd find room for a fast 50 to get a bit more flexibility and to cover darker hours.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

OK,an all around lens for your D810, yes, the 28-300 would do it nicely. Don't forget to lift weights before you go or get a good alternative camera strap for your rig. A black rapid strap would be nice. This combo will easily give you very sharp prints up to 20X30. I don't think you will need anything else. BUT, if you want a really good all in one carry everything in a nice small package please consider the new Sony Cybershot DSC-RX10 III. It has a 24-600 Zeiss T* lens. The Zeiss T* lenses go on the Hasselblad. This camera is truly a all purpose all in one lens package that will take beautiful shots, and, it is in a LIGHT package. Something to consider if your going to walk around a lot.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I do not have experience with this lens, but my experience with Ken Rockwell is such that I consider his opinion very highly. Over the years that has led me astray only once; when I decided NOT to follow his advice. I bought a Nikon P7000 when he recommended a Canon. That P7000 was a terrible dud. Otherwise, he has been consistently on target--well, he was that time too, I just wasn't bright enough to follow.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I have used the lens and have also answered support questions for Nikon with the lens. It is a very good lens for an all-around lens (keeping in mind that in any all-around lens, compromises have to be made in order for it to be all-around). The good side: The lens covers 28-300mm in one lens so the photographer only has to carry it on the camera and is ready for virtually any shot, whether wide or telephoto. It is easy to use, has good results and limits the need to constantly change lenses for different shots. I have some great shots of a wide angle looking down a railroad track at an on coming train using a fairly high ISO in order to stop action. I also have a telephoto shot of a helicopter flying over that I took on the spur of the moment while making the train shot. The helicopter shot stopped the rotors dead and gave a good image of the entire plane without blur. The train shot did the same and the depth of field was good enough to keep the entire train (engine and 5 cars) in good focus plus some of the track in front of the train and the station. Note: these were test shots that I took just before Nikon released the lens to the general public but using lenses intended for Nikon's support staff.
I also made the same shots with Nikon's 18-300mm (intended for the DX) with little degradation. These shots were taken with a Nikon D600 and a Nikon D7000. Now the down side. Both the 18-300 and the 28-300 (full frame) are considered heavy by some photographers, even some of the Nikon support staff. When they brought this up to me, I asked, "so how heavy would a 28-70mm and a 70-300mm lens weigh to carry around to have the same coverage. True you could carry one in a pocket while using the other, but you would have to stop and take time to remove and change lenses each time you wanted to cross the 70mm threshold. Additionally, the lens has a 3.5 f/stop at 28mm and a 5.6 f/stop at 300mm so the photographer has to be aware of this in low light. If I were shooting inside a museum where flash was discouraged and wanted to hand hold, I would probably choose a shorter faster lens. But for general shooting outdoors and in most other cases, if I could only take one lens on a shoot, this would be it.

ronichas Loc: Long Island

I agree. I have a nikon D750 and the 28-300 was the only lens I took to Cuba, Israel and Italy. I also took a Nikon 16 mm fisheye. I love that I can straighten out the fisheye effect in adobe camera raw with the lens correction...if I want.
I think it is a great walk around lens. I know several Nikon pros who also use it.

Your trip sounds awesome!

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

I had this lens when I was shooting with D300s/D700 because I thought an "all in one" lens was a good idea. I found that the images were not as sharp as I wanted and the aperture quickly jumped down to f/5.6 in too many situations. Bear in mind that the best times of day to capture is when he sun is low. When I got back from Europe I traded it for a mint 80-200mm AF f/2.8D, and bought a used 300mm AFS f/4.0. I recently sold both of my older bodies and bought a D810 which demands the best glass to maximize the sensor's potential. If you don't want to carry a bag of lenses, a 24-70 and 80-200 will get you much better results. When you want 300mm, shoot the D810 in DX mode. JMHO.

JMB9250 Loc: Upminster, Essex, UK

I just read an NPhoto article by professional photographer Charles Cramer: www.charlescramer.com who says he is aware from some that the 28-300 is not supposed be one of the best but he borrowed one and got some pretty good shots blown up to 30x40 inches and was very satisfied.

You could try the 70-300 plus another lens as this has very good ratings, but then you would have two lenses to carry.