Nikkor 28-300mm 3.5-5.6 (Page 3): What's interesting to me about your experience is that the sensor density of the D850 and the D500 are almost identical. A lens that delivers...

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

home brewer wrote:

I think the perception of how good the 28 -300 len... (show quote)

What's interesting to me about your experience is that the sensor density of the D850 and the D500 are almost identical. A lens that delivers acceptable performance on one camera should be reasonably expected to provide acceptable performance on the other, with the possible exception of what might happen at the edges on the full frame camera. I don't know how you use your D500, but I use mine exactly like I use my D850, except that I use the D850 for all wide angle circumstances. In my experience, it is difficult to distinguish a well-executed image made with a D500 from a well-executed image executed with a D850. Many people, though, believing their D500 to be a "sports and wildlife" camera, never use it to create what I would consider to be a well-executed image.

BUT...the 18-300 is a completely different lens from the 28-300. So there is an additional variable here. And there were at least a couple of different 28-300 lenses.

A. T.

Thomas902 wrote:

First and foremost A. T. thank you for your servic... (show quote)

Brother Thomas,

First let me say thank you for your very kind words. I'm no hero, I was just Blessed to have a thirty-one year career where I never went to work. It was such a Blessing to be able to serve those in need. People never realize how you can really understand a person's character and heart from their typed words and I can certainly tell that you are an individual that this sin sick world in which we live need more of.

I will certainly take the time to look at all of the sites that you have recommended especially flickr. I know that there are some really nice and very knowledgeable and helpful people in this forum; however, there are those who are not so nice but I understand that every forum has those.

Brother Thomas, I would really love to stay in touch with you but I'm not that familiar with private messaging. I will try to send you my personal contact information if you are willing.

God Bless you Brother and I hope to stay in touch with you.

A. T.

Spirit Vision Photography wrote:

Wise decision.

I think so.

A. T.

jbk224 wrote:

I see you ordered the 24-120..great lens.
How did your analysis of focal length work out?

I haven't conducted the analysis yet but I certainly will. One factor that really pushed me in the 24-120 direction was the fixed aperture which all but one of my lenses are and that one is a super zoom, 150-600. I guess I shouldn't be such a perfectionist when it comes to my photos and this passion that I have developed for photography but I am and I will do whatever it takes to continue to grow.....there's so much to learn.

ELNikkor

Since my 24-120 f4 came with my D750, I added a used Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR for only $150. You can get them on ebay for around $200. It is a great lens and doesn't have the problems some of the 28-300's do. I also like the sharpness, and non-variable extra f-stop of the 24-120 f4.

A. T.

ELNikkor wrote:

Since my 24-120 f4 came with my D750, I added a used Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR for only $150. You can get them on ebay for around $200. It is a great lens and doesn't have the problems some of the 28-300's do. I also like the sharpness, and non-variable extra f-stop of the 24-120 f4.

Thanks for the information. I'm really hapoy with my 28-300, I just wanted the fixed aperture of the 24-120 and thought that it would be a better indoor lens.

Traveller_Jeff

A. T. wrote:

My question to you guys and gals is, has anyone with this lens had any issues with barrel distortion or soft edges? Also, could someone comment on the Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 as a possible walk-around lens. The extra reach of the 28-300mm would be nice but I'd rather not have issues that could not be resolved in post processing.

I recently purchased that lens from a hogger. The lens correction routine in Lightroom clears up any barrel distortion. I was told that at 300mm there would be a slight fall-off at the edges. I think that sort of thing happens with many zoom lenses at their maximum settings. I also have the Tamron G2 150-600mm and that, too, suffers similarly, but post processing has usually resolved that issue similarly. I just shot the moon with the 28-300 at 300mm. I attach it here below for your examination.

User ID

Traveller_Jeff wrote:

I recently purchased that lens from a hogger. The ... (show quote)

Corner shading verrrrrrrry well handled !!!!!

A. T.

Traveller_Jeff wrote:

I recently purchased that lens from a hogger. The ... (show quote)

Good looking photo to me. Thanks for the response and the proof in the pudding photo.

keyo52

A. T. wrote:

My question to you guys and gals is, has anyone with this lens had any issues with barrel distortion or soft edges? Also, could someone comment on the Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 as a possible walk-around lens. The extra reach of the 28-300mm would be nice but I'd rather not have issues that could not be resolved in post processing.

Before you buy the 24-120, why not rent the 28-300 and try it. Most lenses like cars, I suspect, are either really good or lemons.

User ID

Traveller_Jeff wrote:

I recently purchased that lens from a hogger. The ... (show quote)

Since the subject and lighting never change, all frame filling moon pix, except yours, have always looked identical, leaving me to wonder why folks continue to make new ones.

But you have rendered it in a uniquely darker shade of grey, which definitely sets it apart from all those zillions of identical moon shots. Congratulations !

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

Due to orbital mechanics the moon presents slightly different views as it moves around the earth. It is not always the same, but it is very close.

A. T.

keyo52 wrote:

Before you buy the 24-120, why not rent the 28-300 and try it. Most lenses like cars, I suspect, are either really good or lemons.

I already own the 28-300mm, I was just getting an opinion before investing in the 24-120.

User ID

DirtFarmer wrote:

Due to orbital mechanics the moon presents slightly different views as it moves around the earth. It is not always the same, but it is very close.

That is verrrrrrrrrrrrrry important info. Those who shoot the moon should definitely check the charts to be sure they shoot the version that they would most prefer if only they were aware of the significant choices available for them to work with.

After all, no one wants their portrait of the moon to look boringly identical to everyone elses. Thaz clearly why they keep on doing it, time after time, alert for any changes in its pose, or in the lighting, that would really set their version apart from the rest.