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

A 28-300 will be a disappointment. My perspective is that there is no such thing as a walk around lens. There are walk around cameras, like high end point and shoot and bridge cameras. I'd rather have a great lens on a smaller sensor, than a mediocre lens on a great camera.

The D850 is an outstanding camera - there is no point in putting a mediocre lens on it. If you were talking about putting this lens on a D700 or a D3S, I'd say it would be ok - not spectacular, but ok. The Nikon page that pairs lenses with D800/D810/D850 camera bodies does not include the 28-300 for a reason. . . something to consider. If the lens were given to me, I'd give it back or donate it. I wanted it to be a great lens, coming off a relatively good experience with its DX counterpart, but after borrowing 2 from NPS, and another copy from a friend, I found it incredibly underwhelming. But your mileage may differ, and you may find that the convenience of having an 11X zoom that shortens itself to 135mm when at minimum focus distance when zoomed to 300mm, and has awful bokeh is worth the hit in image quality, then I won't try to dissuade you.

You might find this helpful:

https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/578-nikkorafs28300vrff

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-28-300mm-vr

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I use the 24-120mm f/4 for that on my D810 and D850. I find that it needs a little more saturation, but that is easy to fix. It's not as good as your other lenses, but you can easily crop to 200-240mm and still get good results.

I bought ine, which is recent version, for $425 used, but had to add my own hood. Make sure that the "VR" label on top of the lens is gold, not red.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

It's a great walking-around lens. I use it on several cameras including the D810.

User ID

After reading your linked material I went and deleted all the great images from my worthless lens. Surely such results defy science and are therefore witchcraft. I’m hoping deleting them protects my soul.

Leitz Loc: Solms

Since my post the OP has said he's looking for a "walk around lens," which answered my question perfectly. Anything I can add now would be superfluous.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...Maybe a better question should be a recommendation for a walk around lens to use with my D810..."
grandpaw the AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikkor has the potential for epic results on your D810... Provided you work within it's limitations. A decado ago Nikon Professional Services Europe published a listing of Nikkors that are very competent albeit within sometimes a narrow working range and apertures... They rated this lens best from 70-120mm at f/8, f/11 and f/16...

I occasionally use this lens in a studio scenario at f/11 and with stellar results... It's beauty is extreme focus breathing which allows me to deploy it in very limited space... Keep in mind that wide open it simply doesn't do that well... With the aforementioned in mind this Nikkor has a very special place in my "Tool Box"

btw I totally love your Signature Quote "You are known by what you show, not by what you throw..." epic words to live by! Those who pontificate without validation might best be taken with a grain of salt...

To this end I've posted a beauty/fashion editorial I took with this stellar optic...
You can judge for yourself it's capabilities...

Hope this helps grandpaw or is at least food for thought...
All the best on your delightful journey...
.

AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikkor on a D3

(Download)

Quixdraw Loc: x

Have both - recently tested the 28-300 on the D810 for a day trip. I had generally found the lens to be a bit soft on either the DF or D750, and wasn't using it much - found it to be the same on the 810. IMO, a compromise lens that provides a broad range of focal lengths - not a bad travel lens. My experience across the three cameras is that the 24-120 is sharper. With the extra MP of the D810, and cropping, I'll likely mount the 24-120 for my next trip.

flip1948 Loc: Hamden, CT

Over the years I've learned to "filter" his reviews and don't always agree with him like when he denigrates Sigma lenses because they might not work with a camera you might buy 10 years from now. The same can be said for some Nikon lenses.

However, this particular review pretty much stuck to the facts which is why I suggested the OP give it a look.

BebuLamar

I think you're better off bringing only the 24-70 if you don't want to bring all the lenses.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

The fx 70-300 af-p has better image quality

grandpaw

I also own that lens

User ID

My 28-300 cost me less than zero, new in the box, USA version. So I view my results with no mental need to “justify the expense” to myself. If it were not well worth lugging it around I would’ve flipped it fast for an easy $500+, way back when I acquired it.

It’s no super lens, but it helps me take super pix, mainly in daylight. I’m a night crawler so it doesn’t see real heavy use.

And Gene is correct that when it’s not focused to distance the long end is only about 200mm. It’s less than 150mm in close. But would you really need all of 300mm for nearby subjects ? I also use the 24-120 and it’s “shrinkage” at closer distances is negligible. IOW both lenses have similar zoom range indoors and the 24-120 is a stop faster. So consider your most likely use.

-);:/:-;(:;(/-/:;(:-)/::);(-/:-;(;:(-:/(-

I use all three kit lenses, 24-85, 24-120, and 28-300. All keepers. Reading stuffed shirt negative reviews of all of them is great entertainment. Not denying some soft corners, some CA and some famous distortion. None of it has ever ruined a shot. I don’t shoot brick wall grids, and never shoot corner to corner wedding groups wide open. There are better lenses for those sports. If you compete in them, skip the kit lenses. Dirty little secret: my fave personal “walk around” lens is the Tamron 45/1.8. The things it can’t do I just leave undone. No big deal.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I haven't seen that at all. In fact, just the opposite. Any short comings in lens quality is magnified by the high MP body. I use the D850 but essentially the same sensor size. I have never been a fan of wide range zooms and with FF bodies, even more so. I even passed on the "holy trinity" and bought the 80~200 f2.8 instead of the 70~200 for that reason. I've never missed the 10mm difference. I agree with using the VR even though we got along just fine without it for many years.

Quixdraw Loc: x

There is a question in my mind which is better the 24-85 or 24-120. They both are excellent for most purposes. I do think that both are superior, at least to my copy of the 28-300. A real sleeper that I have gotten super results with is the old AF Nikkor 75-300 4.5 5.6. Relatively small and light, metal, and can be had used very inexpensively.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

The 25% greater resolution of the 810 doesn't make a great difference??? Are you high???