dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

Can't argue with THOSE images! Bob, do you feel like the wide end is as sharp as most of the shorter zoom lenses? I know I could continue to carry my DX with the 18-200mm, but the long end is really soft. The DXOMark comparison indicated that the 300mm on my D750 was far sharper than the 200mm on my D5300. That is why I am looking at the 28-300. Most of my shooting is at the widest end, but I like the option of grabbing the occasional intimate shot of a distant subject. Just don't want to lose IQ at wide compared to the 24-85.

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

The street sweeper is a shotgun with a 12 cartridge capacity. Wikipedia says it originated in South Africa in the ‘80s but I thought I had heard the term applied to a shotgun earlier than that.

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

therwol Loc: USA

Here is my opinion of Ken Rockwell, and I'll mentioned that I've exchanged a number of emails with him in the past. He absolutely knows his business and puts a lot into his reviews and web site in general. On the other hand, he is not always serious. You have to figure out when to take him seriously. He often states that the equipment he is reviewing is his favorite, and that's obviously impossible. He has compared lenses by taking pictures of bushes. He once compared digital with film by comparing the images taken by an early 6 megapixel digital camera with those taken by a 4x5 large format camera. Guess which images came out better. And by the way, he greatly prefers modern Canon equipment to Nikon's. He told me this privately, and it's buried somewhere in his web site as well. I read what he has to say. I don't discard what he has to say. I compare it with what others have to say. I draw my own conclusions.

dmeyer Loc: Marion, NC

Wasn't aware of the Tamron 28-300, but will investigate that. Fortunately, my D750 is fairly light, so the savings in weight offsets the slightly heavier 28-300 lens over my 24-85...vs the folks using the 28-300 on D8xx series. I am looking to try the rental route.

jno

I agree! The weight of the 2 lenses isn't that much more than the 28-300 and the IQ is much better!

ChrisRL

Quote from Ken Rockwell:
"The original Nikon 24-120mm AF-D has been a popular lens for folks who want to travel light.

Newsmen of the 1990s dubbed it the "Streetsweeper" because, much as the large-magazine, fully automatic shotguns of the same name can single-handedly eliminate a street full of uncooperative personnel, this lens can deal with just about any photo opportunity it might encounter.

The Nikon 24-120mm goes from wide to close up in the twist of the wrist. It gets wide enough to get in close to a fight, and long enough to grab a shot of someone just about to throw a grenade some distance away.

Some newsmen used this as their lenscap lens when they were just wandering around, not knowing what to expect. It's well enough built to handle their abuse, and can do just about anything if it has to."

Though I wasn't a news photographer in the 1990's myself, my mentor and guru and boss was. He used two of the older street sweepers on his Nikons, one in B/W 400 neg and one in Kodachrome 25 or 64. Had them on there as lens caps, as Ken says, UV filters, no hoods, that's it.

I had an original before I swapped it out for the f/4, which is a better lens. Carried on his tradition of always testing and trading up for better copies when possible, which is why my set of primes are pretty much as sharp as Nikon ever made.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Sorry for wrong designation ...Tamron 28-200 XR

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Yes, I remember this now - actually, the 12 gauge shotgun had a drum magazine holding 25 !

ELNikkor

Ken Rockwell likes it and shows some very sharp pictures done with it. He mentions that, while being a stop slower than the 24-120, it is not much different in size, but has a lot more range. I personally shoot with the D750 and 24-120 f4, which does most of my shooting. When I want longer, I go to the Nikon 70-300, (which I paid $125 for pristine used). Probably best to rent the 28-300 for a week and see if it suits you first.

RoswellAlien

28-300 pretty much lives on my 850. Definitely not light, but I like what it does.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I prefer the simple approach as well. If post processing with modern photo editors with lens profiles having the best lenses is less important than it was in the past. Unless printing large or making deep crops you may not notice the difference except when pixel peeping side by side images...and most of us never do that.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I guess the photography community that I regularly hang out with avoid using these cutesy nicknames.
--Bob

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

A decent review of this lens - https://dustinabbott.net/2014/08/tamron-28-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-vc-pzd/
.

alphadog

The 28-300mm lens is NOT a great lens, it is a good convenient lens... for landscape, it gets by, for nature definitely NOT sharp enough... compared to prime and other lenses....thanks, sold mine long ago... at that time replace it with a Nikon 300mm f4, which will destroy the zoom results....each person must weigh what works best for them.