Nikon 70-300, 24-120 and 28-300 (Page 2): Congrats on your new D750! I also upgraded from the D7000 to the D750 and absolutely love it. I have both the 28-300 and the 24-120. I bought...

jcwall396 Loc: Roswell, GA

Romy klein wrote:

I need some advice and opinions on what lens to ke... (show quote)

Congrats on your new D750! I also upgraded from the D7000 to the D750 and absolutely love it. I have both the 28-300 and the 24-120. I bought the 28-300 to use as my all-purpose walk around lens, and I've been very happy with the IQ, but I'm now starting to use the 24-120 a bit more. The reason is the wide end - 28mm is just a bit too narrow and 24mm, even though it's only 4mm, seems to make a difference.

The other thing I'd say is, take a look at the photographs you've taken over the last couple of years. Where are the bulk of your focal lengths? I did this little exercise and was surprised to find that about 90% of my shots are between 24mm and 85mm. Very few were on the higher end to warrant the 300mm. Just some more stuff to think about! I think you'll be happy with either one of those lenses.

RSQRD Loc: SW Florida

If you are interested in BIF stick with the 70-300 VR II

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

BboH wrote:

I like the 28-300 for a walk-around.
Question for you - inasmuch as all of your lenses will work with the D750, I hope you are not disposing of some because you think they will not "work" with the 750???

BboH, Am keeping the D7000. I have 3 lenses for the D7000: 40mm prime for closeup stuff, the 18-105 kit lens, and like a dope I bought a DX 55-300 which I have used only 3 times. I should try the DX 55-300 on the D750 to see the effect. But I am still thinking that an FX 24-70 or a 24-85 might be more to my liking as a walk-around. -FiddleMaker

russraman Loc: New York City

Of all the lenses I use with my Nikon Df, I generally use my Nikkor 28-300 the majority of the time, mainly because it offers the greatest flexibility with excellent results. Before you buy any more Nikkor AF-S lens for your new camera, be sure to check out Nikon's refurbished gear area on nikonusa.com. Everything I've purchased on this site arrives quickly and in perfect condition, and the only thing you don't get is the gold box it was originally packed in. You will save lots of money by buying "refurbished" on Nikon's web site.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Screamin Scott wrote:

What version of the 24-120 ? If the latest (fixed F4 aperture) I'd say keep that one

I concur. I have seen many professionals and advanced amateurs with this lens and I have seen their results.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Romy klein wrote:

I need some advice and opinions on what lens to ke... (show quote)

Image quality, if you refer to sharpness, is something that depends more on you that on the lens you are using. If you enlarge your images often to a size of 20x30 or beyond you need a professional lens but if you do not then for your traveling I would recommend that you keep the 28-300.
Let me start by saying that I do not own or have used that lens but I am very familiar with it and I have been impressed by the quality of its images. Right now I have a friend shooting in Montana with that lens and the images he has sent me are breath taking.
All modern optics will give you very pleasant results if you do your part.

Flash Falasca Loc: Beverly Hills, Florida

28-300

Golan Loc: Imsbach, Germany

Here's the link to a comparison of these two lens. Essentially, they are so close that the reviewer chose the 28-300 because it is equal in IQ, is cheaper, and has a longer reach.

http://nikonrumors.com/2010/10/24/nikon-24-120mm-f4g-ed-vr-vs-nikon-28-300mm-f3-5-5-6-ed-vr.aspx/

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Golan wrote:

Here's the link to a comparison of these two lens. Essentially, they are so close that the reviewer chose the 28-300 because it is equal in IQ, is cheaper, and has a longer reach.

http://nikonrumors.com/2010/10/24/nikon-24-120mm-f4g-ed-vr-vs-nikon-28-300mm-f3-5-5-6-ed-vr.aspx/

Golan, thanks for posting the above link. It was very helpful. Ken Rockwell also gives a comparison between these exact 2 lenses. His evaluation is the reason why I selected the 28-300 for my D750. I am still considering something smaller. The 50mm prime would be nice but it is very limited. Both flavors of the Nikon 24-70 are real pricy. The two 24-85 models are more reasonable. -FiddleMaker

Romy klein

FiddleMaker wrote:

Romy, I also have a DX D7000 and the D750 with a 28-300. But I find the 28-300 to be a tad heavy as a walk-around lens. I am thinking along the lines of an 18-35 or the 24-70 or the 24-85 for the D750. My concern with the 18-35 is too much distortion near the 18mm end of the lens.
What are your thoughts on these 3 lenses ?
Anyone else is welcome to chime in.
Thanks, -FiddleMaker

I have not tried any of those lenses, however all the comments and recommendations I hear is that the 24-70 is the one. Actually part of the Holly Trinity, but it is a little bit expensive comparing to the 24-85. I really like the 24-120, I just got the 28-300 so I need to walk around with it in order to make a decision. Thanks for your input!

Romy klein

FiddleMaker wrote:

Golan, thanks for posting the above link. It was very helpful. Ken Rockwell also gives a comparison between these exact 2 lenses. His evaluation is the reason why I selected the 28-300 for my D750. I am still considering something smaller. The 50mm prime would be nice but it is very limited. Both flavors of the Nikon 24-70 are real pricy. The two 24-85 models are more reasonable. -FiddleMaker

Thanks Golan!

Romy klein

BboH wrote:

I like the 28-300 for a walk-around.
Question for you - inasmuch as all of your lenses will work with the D750, I hope you are not disposing of some because you think they will not "work" with the 750???

Yes I am aware that all of them work with an FX camera. I am selling my D7000 with the 18-200 and 17-55 2.8 :(
Thanks for your advice!

Golan Loc: Imsbach, Germany

FiddleMaker, it all depends on what you like to shoot. I just ordered a 14-24, 2.8, because I like to shoot clouds, landscapes and buildings, etc. The 28-300 will be a great complement to that lens. I favor a 35mm prime over the 50mm prime because I get a bit more scene to crop (it's a lot heavier, though). I also carry a Sony RX-100 III and Canon SX-710 HS to add flexibility. I hate to say it, but my iPhone 6+ camera sometimes does the best job. I guess my point is I have a lot of fun with my cameras and lenses, but also have a lot of non-professional pictures to show for it. I'm also hooked on the technology that's wrapped up in these little devices. We've come a log way since the Brownies.

Gobuster Loc: South Florida

My recommendation is the 28-300 - if I had to choose just one lens, that would be the one. I have a D610 and the following: 70-300VR, 28-300VR, 24-85VR, 16-35VR, 70-210D, 28-105 plus 24,50,& 85 primes. After lots of experimentation, when I travel I invariably grab the 28-300 and 16-35 as the only two to carry - wide range in a small package with good quality, Yes the zooms may have some more distortion and CA than the primes, but, both these are easily corrected - in camera if shooting JPEGS or Lightroom if shooting RAW. I've made beautiful 24x36" prints using both lenses.

paulrap Loc: Connecticut

I have had all three lens at one time or another but have found the 28-300 the most versatile for my purposes. It has been my carry around lens on my D200, D3s and my D750. It is on the bulky side but that is overshadowed by the convenience. I have a wide range of primes and zooms but my 28-300 is rarely off my camera of the day.