You mean 3 lenses ......by the way keep this lens, until you bought your 3 pie in the sky chocolate unicorn lenses, as in several years you’ll buy yet another megapixel dream body, and need to get 12 primes, because you’ll once again be over those 3 lenses because they just don’t seem to be up to it yet once again. On and on and on and on it goes. My advice, just take stunning photos.....relax on the gear, or the mega megapixel games. Be better than that.
Exactly. I think we have all seen photographers with the new latest and greatest, and couldn't shoot worth a plug nickel, and then other photographers with run-of-the-mill gear that always seemed to get absolutely stunning photographic art. Knowlege, experience, and imagination will trump gear every time.
Thanks, James, you are right about it being a compromise. I have a similar love/hate with the 28-300. I think you'll ultimately regret it, namely because you notice those defects more than your customers ever would, and other defects are auto-correctable in post. I guess it all depends on where and what you shoot. If you hike into the mountains, like I do, the 28-300 is invaluable... Awesome cloud coverage on the distant peak-zoom in and get it. Nice flowers leading up to that peak-zoom out and get that too. A bear walks on the trail for 5 seconds, you can get that too. I'd have to do 2 lens changes and would probably a)never end up changing because of the hassle, and/or b)miss the bear entirely. Let us know how it goes.
Thanks James! Yeah I definitely miss its flexibility. I think it comes into it's own when travelling, I haven't actually done that much lately so I guess the real test will be on my next trip. Currently using the Tamaron 24-70 g2 and I'm very impressed with the quality, but yeah not same flexibility. Thanks for sharing your thoughts 👍
I'm of a similar mind, as I've been using the 28-300mm on my D750 for 4 years, and although it can be soft on some shots, many many are spot on, giving wonderful detail! With that said, if I'm using the lens at low light, I'll switch it out to my 7-200mm VR, but the 28-300mm has still given me some nice blue hour shots, by just using exposure compensation. Overall, the 28-300mm is as you say, a fabulous travel lens, and for the most part I use a carbon fibre gimbal head, so even with the lens extended, I get no creep. I've never come across the focus rubber issue you mention on my lens, there again, I don't travel the world either, and just deal with the temperatures of North America!
I came here because I just upgraded to the d850, and when I pixelpipe, that's when I notice the softness to a LITTLE degree. Depending on your priority you either accept it or not. There're many factors that come into play in choosing a gear, for me the 28-300mm is just like the d850, jack of all trade and master of all..it's image output sharp. Other factors like weight, number of lens to travel with, filter diameter size ( 77mm is so common ), VR, durability ( I have dropped mine a couple of times, yet my test shows it's still sharp and no issues ), and best of all PRICE makes this lens a regrettable decision to let go off. In my case, I have the 16-35mm( for landscape ) and 28-300mm ( every other thing lens ). To complement the 28-300mm, I got 2 primes - 50mm f1.8 ( group shot, protrait full length, low light photography, video ) and the 105mm f2.8d macro ( macro && head shot portrait ). With 4 lens, you've got all genre covered - 28-300mm (300mm) for action and sports in DX Crop mode.
Hi James. My recommendation for you is to use Nikkor f1.8G primes (20mm, 35mm, 50mm). I would also highly recommend the Tamron 70-200mm G2. It's a superb lens and it's really not worth spending a fortune on the latest Nikkor version. I use these lenses on a D810 36mp camera and they work fantastically. Wishing you good luck in your next purchases.
We all know, if we are honest, that modern cameras alongside decent lenses do the job: it's the photographer that makes the image. Pixel peeping is almost a pathology. I have it too... What’s more important when moving around: the flexibility to take the shot, to make the image? Or switching out primes, while losing the moment?
Thanks for watching. I get your point but since filming this I have to say getting rid of this lens has been one of the best choices I've ever made. I genuinely feel the quality of my images has improved significantly and its changed the way I shoot (slow methodical thoughtful, rather then run and gun etc). The 28-300 is still great though and will suit many people perfectly
The only time I'm pixel peeping is when I am using a macro lens to do copy work. For that very reason I still shoot about a third of my pictures using film cameras or a D3 with af-d lenses.
I know it's late. But a very popular walk-around lens is the Nikkor 24-85mm, it's very sharp, not too cheap, not too expensive. Then you can pair that with a Telephoto lens (70-200, etc.)
I totally don't disagree with his opinion, but the renowned camera critic, Ken Rockwell, took some outstanding photos with this lens, using the new Nikon d780. Go to this website, www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d780.htm Scroll down to see his outstanding images with the 28-300. No photoshop or post processing of any kind. Jpeg images straight out of the camera. I was shocked. The reason I didn't buy this lens for my d750 was the concerns that James brought out on this video. However, after looking at Rockwell's photos, I might pick this lens up.
If your goal is to fully justify the d850 sensor then go for a prime lens. May be a 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 will be a good combination. Even the best 24-70 can’t match these lenses in picture quality
James! What did you find instead? Thanks for this video.....in fact, because of some web's when you put the Q what is the best lens for Nikkon ...I started looking... maybe to dismantling my travel gear set... which is Nikkor 24-70 2.8(82mm)''' welded'' to D850 and 70-200 II 2.8 ''welded'' to another D850 and monopod from Gitzo... yes bit heavy but... I love the sweet weight.....But looks like recently I started having ideas'' maybe'' something for change.... then I found your review....So .... just keep maintaining the ''weld''? .... my wife helping me on travels too because I hung on her neck D750 mostly with 50mm or Tamron 15-30 2.8 G2 and Tamron 35 1.4.... Yes is weight, yes I don't need to pay an extra pass for the gym... yes I have to leave a few things at home instead.... yes I have the best gear with me.... What did You find?
So what are you going to replace that lens with? You will need several primes to cover that range which means extra size and weight when traveling. I travel a lot and am considering the 28-300 for my Nikon D7100. I have a 12-24 for ruins and temples and a 105 for portraits which I will leave home when on the road.
Mike Ikeda hi Mike, I've replaced this lens with the 24-70 Tamaron G2 and 70-200 Nikon f4. A bit heavier collectively but the quality is miles better 👍
MIke, I also have a D7100, and my lenses are the 10-24DX, 35G (1.8), 50G (1.8), 105 (2.8), and the 28-300. As you say with the 28-300 and a wide zoom you have the range covered. I always bring the 10-24 for interiors, landscapes and macro on things that don't frighten. If you and I had FXs we could leave the wide zoom at home as well. (But I would miss the 10-24's macro.) As you have the 105 you know the creamy bokah it provides; and you would be leaving that at home with the 105. With wide angles, you're never going to have creamy bokah, but the 10-24 is not bad when shoved up the nose of a plant or whatever. The 28-300 gets you the shot you might have missed, but as James says, it will always be missing something and be more like a snapshot. It will tell the story but it won't be eye candy. From 35mm days I also have a 70-200 f/4-5.6 AF-D that at 200 mm has the creamy bokah and just kills the 28-300. (In fact, it's the lens that taught me bokah exists as a lens quality.) If I am taking primes and think I'll want a 200 that goes in the bag instead of the 28-300. On the other hand, when I bring the primes and start swapping lenses again and again it just drives my wife up the wall and kills the fun. She also hates it when she says, "Oh look, can you get that shot? And I reply, "wrong lens on and it'll be gone by the time I swap."" But when we get home she loves the eye candy of the primes (and the 10-24). On the other hand when wanting to just enjoy and record the trip the 28-300 is perfect.
Your lens looks like it is worn out. There is no paint left on it. How has it been stored? Did you see a serviceman before you ditched it? I use a Tamron 28-300 VC. Much lighter than the Nikon, not the same quality as my primes, but I love that lens, it's a travel lens that gives more than OK pictures. I have a Tamrom 70-300 as well, and it is sharper than the Nikon 70-300 VR.
No question about it, your lens is broke or the optics are misaligned. the Nikon 28-300 is one of the sharpest lenses out there, its well ducumented. its insainly sharp! Constantly out performs my 2 Primes and my 24-70 on a D750 tested them @ F8 This is my go to lens for most things. and its not a compromise I get better Image quality. many magnitudes better than my 24-70 less fringeing and sharper across the whole image and should be absoloutly AWESOME on a D850.
I couldn't agree more. I just finished an exhaustive comparison between my 70-200VRI and my 28-300 on my D810, and the 28-300 performed exceptionally well. Resolution at 200mm was as good, if not better than the 70-200. The 70-200 had a bit better contrast, but even the standard wall test showed no resolution differences. I compared multi-image panoramas, and the 28-300 had virtually identical results. What was really shocking was the extra detail available when I compared resolution of 300mm shots versus 200mm shots cropped to the same image size. The 300mm shots showed much higher resolution, indicating there was little resolution loss at the maximum zoom. As a comparison, I shot the same sets of images with my Panasonic GX85 m43, and it wasn't even in the same league.
I am currently in a similar position. I used to own a D5200, with Sigma 17-70mm and a Tamron 70-300mm. I don't have those anymore, I have a D780 body instead and that without a single lens. With that said, I am currently looking into what might work and yet still be cheap enough as I can not afford the real high end lenses. I was looking into options regarding super zooms because it would be handy and much cheaper. But more and more I fear I should rather look at smaller zoom ranges. Unfortunately the Sigma 17-70mm isn't a option for my current camera or I'd buy that without a second thought, loved that lens and i'm really unhappy I had to get rid of it because of it not being compatible with this new body. With you having a similar camera, can you give me some advice regarding these lenses? Perhaps mention what you have currently?
Hi, Is it a good idea to ditch my kit lenses -AF-P DX 18-55mm 3.5/5.6 VR and AF-P 70-300mm 4.5/6.3 VR ED- for a: FX AF-S 28-300mm 3.5/5.6 VR (offer for $250 USD)? I have a D3400 a 50mm 1.8G and a DX 35mm 1.8G I like taking photos anywhere and I mainly shoot animal (birds, dogs, etc.)
I use this lens with my D810 and have gotten the sharpest landscape photo's I've ever gotten of Big Bend National Park with it and, some of those even handheld. Most of my pics are sharp from front to back. I love this lens!
LAZY DOG YeahI’d like to know too. All superzooms are compromised from the get-go. It’s inevitable given their optical design complexity. Great travel lenses though. Heck, I wish it were otherwise, but if the 28-300 genuinely excelled IQ wise, the market for more costly lenses would have taken a serious hit. It hasn’t, and we all know why.
Thanks for sharing. Very informative video, if a bit depressing. Just bought the 28-300 to save having to swap lenses during hiking trips. I'll be using it with a D7200, so hopefully the limitations won't be that noticeable until I upgrade to a full frame.
MafiaProtectron thanks! Don't worry, the superzoom is a superb lens. So no need to regret your choice, it will serve you fantastically and be perfect for hiking 👍
James, great blog for the bit more experienced photographer. I’ve been happy with a 24-105 and a 70-200. I also carry a 400 prime for wildlife. One thing to consider - don’t feel you have to avoid overlap between the lenses. I love that I have about 35 mm between the two main lenses I use. You simply do not want to be changing lenses that much should you want to zoom in or out a bit more. Best, Dave
It's been 2 years now - how do you feel about having ditched this lens? Since it's been two years now I imagine you've had the retrospect... Curious to know if you still feel the same way...
I'm trying to move to FX from DX and am a street and wildlife photographer. Would you recommend getting this as an initial investment for a guy trying to shift to FX?
whakabuti absolutely i would! This is a very good purchase that will stand the test of time. Combined with a wide angle and a telephoto these 3 lenses are everything you need.
Thanks for the reply! If I may trouble you once more, would you recommend this over a 24-120mm f/4? It's just that I'd be intimidated taking the 28-300mm on the crowded streets etc. It's seems super chunky and I wouldn't want it to get damaged or give me away for candid street photography due to its size. :) Haha opportunity cost is such a big problem for photographers since it's such an expensive hobby!
@@whakabuti , I used the 24-120 for two weeks on a D750, it was very nice, and easy to handle. I also just upgraded to the D850, and with its large files, I am going to stay away from the super zoom. I have the DX 18-300 on a D7500, and although it gets the job done, it's a little soft.
I can understand you ditching it for superior lenses. I have the D850 and have the Nikon 24-70 2.8, Tamron 15-30mm and Tamron 70-200. But i really enjoy using the 28-300 as a walk around lens when out messing around with the family. Or just when i want to take one lens out. I think it still has its place for convenience. I also find the image quality still pretty good. My copy is very sharp on the D850.
yeah, unfortunately you have gotten on to the 'gear acquisition treadmill;' that lens most probably suited your previously owned lower MP camera body superbly
I have the D850 and the 28-300 like you. The only difference is I think this lens is better than very sharp using the D850. Maybe you are more discriminating than I am. But I’m very happy with the quality and to replace this lens with 2 is not very appealing.
@@sean7193 yeah, it’s pretty much the only lens I use. But that’s mostly because I take photos at 300mm so much. I use the other lens (24mm) whenever I do a bit of photo work for a relative’s architecture firm (interiors, so need as wide angle as possible).
Hello again. I'm just starting out and I was pleased with some of the pictures you showed using that lens (Kilimanjaro and the seal). Considering that I will be using my new D750 for similar purposes and the fact that I've no plans to upgrade to a D850 in the near future, would you say that a 28-300mm should pair up nicely with my D750?
James, I think I understand your point. You can't have everything in one lens, if this 28-300 were exceptional no one would wear prime lenses. Flexibility versus quality, that is the point. And here evaluating this margin is very complicated. It is obvious that with a trained eye you like others are going to see the defects of an all-terrain lens but these flaws ruin the photo? Those who see the photo tell you, "bahh you are a comfortable o lazy man who uses an all-terrain lens". I think not, that the problem is that one tends to see the optical defect over the fact of the shoot. If every gram counts on a travel, maybe this 28-300 is irreplaceable. Or accept the challenge of carrying only one lens just 50 or a 35 or a 28 prime lens. Thanks.
Really interesting dilemma, which I shared. In the end I tried the Nikon 24-120 VR, (latest version) Not quite the reach but as a travel lens, in my view outstanding, compact and well made. In a trip across China it covered all but a very few extreme shots. The bigger dilemma is that now I have started using a Fuji mirrorless, the X H1 in my case. Fuji lenses seem to be in a different class to Nikon, vastly superior and the combination of better glass and a more compact weather sealed body provided the perfect, lighter travel kit. Hardly ever use my Nikon D750 now sell it?.
I used to have an old Nikon D50 camera with an 18-200mm. I recently bought a Fuji X-T3 and I can't find any lenses that give a lot of this kind of flexibility, just the 16-80mm lens which isn't great. I wonder why they stopped making these in modern cameras while they were very prevalent 15 years ago!
@@JamesBrewphoto I just did a personal test and we are BOTH WRONG! the lens itself is not a problem at all. i tested it on the D800 and the D850. both files are JUST AS SHARP when it was on tripod. so problem is camera shake. sensor shows the shake MUCH more on the D850.
Understand totally about your thoughts on the super zoom lens James I owed the 18-200 mm nikon lens and I also ended up not using it much I think it’s been 2 years or more so maybe I should get it sold, the lenses your thinking of buying both the 24-70 and the 70-200 are superb glass very sharp I don’t think you’ll go far wrong with either , good luck James look forward to you results with either, best wishers Shaun.
Thanks for the down to earth review. I was considering the 28-200 lens for my Nikon D750 but now I am inclined to get another D750 body. I will mount my Tamron 24-70 G2 on one and Tamron 70-200 G2 on the other. A little bulky but will have peace of mind.
You are one of the very rare native english speakers who are able to pronounce "Nikon" correct, so that was a huge plus for me in this video :D For the new lenses I'd rather look at Sigma and Tamron than Nikon, because what ever advantage the Nikon lenses are supposed to have is overshadowed by the huge amount of saved money with the other two brand (and their lenses are also not cheap). Cheers from Germany =)
Haha - your the second person to comment on that. I'm going to be super aware of how I say that word from now on. Yes, the Tamaron G2 pairing of the 24-70 and 70-200 is looking like a very tempting option. They look as good as the more expensive Nikon versions from all the research I've done 👍
Good luck on the "faster glass" option. I bought the 28-300 for a D850 because my (2) f2.8 lenses are very heavy. Yes, they are sharp, but i can shapen the superzoom and not have back problems.
If you are a pixel peeper then you will find fault with this or any lens. This is actually considered one of Nikon’s sharpest zooms next to the 24-85mm G VR. In real world usage this lens is outstanding. If you plan to do a 1:1 crop on a D850 I would suggest most lenses will fall short.
Thx for sharing your thoughts. On the longer end you might want to check out the Nikon 70-200 f4 paired with x1.4 TC which even wide open delivers superb optical performance in a small and lightweight package for landscape / nature photographers. Good trade off between speed and portability plus VR.
Great video James, I love hearing about people´s experiences with their equipment and the advantages and disadvantages, I have been thinking about getting another lens for a while, but it is a really big decision, at the moment, I only have an 18 - 55mm lens, what would you suggest?
Thanks Benn. I think it depends on the speed and quality of that 18-55 lens. It may well be worth investing in some f2.8 glass. These lens tend to produce superior images and also hold their long term value quite well. I'm looking at a 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 pairing. Still researching though
Very interesting video. I don’t know enough about lenses to make an educated comment but I do enjoy hearing about people’s choice of lenses and the good, bad and ugly things about them. I look forward to hearing about your research and what you choose. 👍
I really noticed this yesterday while shooting photos of jets at an Airshow. Even though I was shooting f8 at 1/8000 of a second (on a D800 body), the photos lacked the sharpness I got using a Tamron 70-300 on a D750. It's a great lens for photojournalism, as long as the images are solely for the internet, but terrible for high quality prints.
Informative James, thanks. I was thinking of buying this for travel, however not now. I own the D850 and pair it with the Tamron 24-70mm and Nikon 80-200mm f2.8. I'll stick with those. Thanks Rick from Aus.
Have that same one as my do everything walk around shooter. I don't enlarge or print my images, just post on social media or enjoy on my computer screen. Good enough for me for my real, not imagined needs.
The rubber grip thing... my 70-200 f2.8 VRII does the same and not even in hot climates. Use it for an hour and its slipping about. So probably just a Nikon lens thing.
Wow - so it's not just me then! Must be a Nikon problem. It's really unforgiveable given the price of the gear. A big minus for buying Nikon again for me
James Brew I have the 18-300 and the same problem with the rubbers, only 2 years old as well. The white paint has come off the lens where it says M-AF and its not even raised lettering so once it’s gone, it’s gone.. think I am going to try a bit of white enamel.
I’d highly recommend a 70-200 Tamron 2nd hand, great value for a solid, sharp (heavy) amazing lens. I have the 28-300 too on the D810 and your points are valid although it’s still capable of some great shots and hugely versatile. Happy shooting!
Suggest me bro. Im gonna upgrade my dx camera to fx. Right now im stuck with the thought whether to buy nikon d750 or canon 6d mark ii. If nikon which lens to prefer 28-300 or 24-120mm
I kept both my 24-120mm F4 lens and my 28-300mm lens as when I need the reach, the longer lens works and gets more detail and higher pixel count on images or subjects as I don't need to crop in from shorter lens. I don't like to switch lens outdoors so these lenses are good. I use the 24-120mm f4 for faster focusing ability over the other lenses. Both of the lenses have decent enough sharpness for my purposes. I also have an ultrawide Tokina Pro Opera lens 16-28mm FF lens for wider landscape and realty.
I had the 18-200mm VR Nikon superzoom for DX. It was not the sharpest lens (on my D90), however, as an amateur, it did what I needed it to do and I loved the convenience. Now, shooting FX, I have the Nikon 24-85mm VR. It's sharp as hell but the vignetting is ridiculous and doesn't go away until you're at f/8. Prior to buying the lens, I did not see or read anything about how bad the vignetting is. If your style and subject matter is conducive, you're better off saving your money and shooting with the old manual focus Nikon AI and AI-s lenses. If you shoot landscapes, why do you 'need' autofocus?
Think I'd be tempted to try out a prime lens James. They tend to be quicker and sharper due to their build and lower aperture capability. Some good deals out there on second hand equipment at the moment. For landscape I picked up a NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED for £350 or perhaps something that's a little more flexible like the Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM ART. Which can be used for a number of things ( Street/Portrait/Landscape) and is good in low light. Quite a few people commented just how sharp this lens was for the price point.
Good video James. Always interesting to hear the reasons for changing. The rubber grip thing was also an issue on my old DX 18-105 lens. I put it down to the plastic body combined with the rubber grip (but not sure if your superzoom is a plastic body so that could be completely wrong. When I upgraded to FX I went for the 16-35 f/4 and the 70-200 f/2.8 (love them both). As I rarely shoot between 36 and 69 mm anyway I saved money, space and weight and didn't get the 24-70, just a 50mm f1/8 prime for the rare occasions when I need something in the middle. I'll look forward to seeing what you buy and what your feelings are about the quality when you've used them.
Thanks Ralph. So the rubber grip issue is not just me getting unlucky then. Must be a Nikon issue, which is really poor really. Yeah I do like the idea of a prime covering that mid focal range. I will do some research into this as a potential option. Your setup sounds great 👍
Let me help you with something. I have one of these and gave it to my girlfriend. She took it on our last trip to see the petrified forest and death valley and the alabama hills. I took my d850 and a nikon 24-70 that I used most of the time and a tamron 70-200 lens that are the cats meow for the greatest lenses ever to grace a d850 and i also took a macro 105 nikon. Well let me tell you. I started to notice it when going through the airport. My camera bag with these lenses liked to killed me from the weight. And when getting to death valley and the other places we went. The weight became unbearable. My girl friend with her only one nikon 28-300 lens and took photo's just as devastatingly great as mine with my much superior lenses. Her camera bag was so so light with that one lens. and that lens took great macro with boca. I am now going to buy another nikon 28-300 as a camera lens. Yes yes yes if i am going to do a portrait shoot near home I will have my better zooms. But if I am traveling and want the greatest lens (for my taste) fantastic photographs I never in my life want to suffer like I did under weight of those three lenses I took with me on our last trip. Sure I got great photographs with those three lenses but the sheer physical horror of toteing all those heavy lenses around on such a long hot trip. I will never do that again. It will be this nikon 28-300 and I will throw my very light tamron 45mm 1.8 vibration controlled boca friendly lens in the bag if i want night shots or portraits. Please note these two lenses will be my travel lens. For professional portraits here near home I also use and 85mm lens. But for travel and comfort my high end lenses will be safe queens till I get back. And I am going to be happy as a pig in slop with my light weight, easy dream to carry nikon 28-300 and my 45mm tamron. For a side note: For one of her photo's she got down on level with a lizard sitting on top of a petrified log and got a macro photo of that colorful lizard that was so sharp it was absolutely unbelievably incredible. It was so sharp you could see the tiniest details of it's eyes and skin. It is so sharp I only wish i could past it here to let you see that I don't think any lens in the world could be as sharp, colorful and have such great boca as that 28-300 did on that lizard.
James, thank you for a very informative review. I don't have this lens but I was considering it for some landscape photography in the Adirondacks (NY). Thinking that this lens could replace my 24 - 70 and my 80-200 (2.8) to save substantial weight on my hikes. Like you, I recently upgrade to an 850 from a 500 so I would be in the same situation as you. This review was very helpful.
Does this mean that you are going to abandon (i.e ditch) all your, now disappointing, photos taken with this lens? If you are going to replace this lens start with the 24-120 mm f4 Nikkor.
it's always a compromise, but one thing that is not imho emphasized enough for people who get into this hobby new, such as me, is the fact that we are talking pros and cons and better/worse about the products which are in the top 10% of the quality available. Get a 18-300, 28-300, 18-200/400, whatever and go take photos, they will be stunning compared to 90% of the options available on the market(phones, compacts, 1" senzors etc etc). The reviewers (not particularly this one) make it seems like u gotta buy 5 lenses and sell your organs in the process. But you don't. You are gonna get 90% of the quality possible with 1 lens and more importantly, it will be in your backpack on every trip and in your hand everytime you have to snap a moment, and that's what counts, return home with a photograph, not with a missed opportunity. Then over time, as the author here ,you decide if you wanna 'upgrade' to dedicated lenses and which ones would suit your use, or you are just fine w the superzoom, since it will still nail all the IG/social media/family events/work presentations, smaller prints etc etc.
I went from this with a 7000 to a Sony RX10 iv - I was just fed up with the Nikon softness. The Sony is extraordinarily sharp - all the way up to 600mm. Only a 1 inch sensor which is not so good for fast/high iso in low light, hence I am considering adding an FF body (750/780?) for lower light. But I hate weight - I gave up photography for years due to the weight of 2 bodies, lenses, flash, tripod... There's just no perfect answer. The best I can do is try and predict my main uses and get a kit to fit that - #1 for me is "a kit that I will actually be bothered to use"!
I recently purchased the Z7 and used this with the fTZ adapter for portability as my 70-200 f2.8 is a beast to carry around. I agree, I became very disappointed with the quality of the images and started to wonder if it was the camera lol..
You wo'nt regret getting rid of that lens James. I have had a D850 since last September (5000+ shots) and I am finding that the older Ai-s Primes (50mm f1.8) Pancake (28mm f2.8) CRC are really surprising good on the larger sensor. I got rid of the Sigma 50mm Art as my go to 50mm in favour of the pancake (Japanese metal one) The 24-70mm E version is as good as all the primes though. The 70 -200 FL is the best lens I have ever shot with.
Lol it’s always been about the holy trinity. I wouldn’t expect any other Nikon Glass to perform on an 850. In fact I actually think that Nikon’s current best glass isn’t good enough to realise the potential of the 850.
You are questioning the quality of the Nikon lens, and then are considering a Sigma or Tamron??? I have used both (I owned the Tamron and borrowed the Sigma), In my beginning days of photography, graduating from point-and-shoot cameras, and even in those days considered both of those to be borderline crap. I now shoot with a Nikon Nikkor 18-300 3.5-6.3 DX VR ED lens. Prime lenses obviously have a bit of an edge over zooms, but if you haven't already, I would recommend at least road testing the above-mentioned zoom. And if you do decide to buy other zooms, if you are the quality photographer we all hope that you are, at least spend a bit more and buy a quality brand!
James, so refreshing to hear an honest and considered "gear" discussion on RUclips LOL! But you nailed it. The D850 raises the stakes (I know, I have one). Looking forward to seeing what you choose. Myself, for what it's worth, I stuck with Nikon (ensures compatibility with future bodies - don't ask how I know LOL) - 24-70 2.8 VR and 70-200 2.8E. The 70-200 is exceptional. Occasional use of either a 1.4TC III or Nikon 300PF makes it all happen. Downside? Cost, weight, changing lenses in the field. Currently I'm experimenting with smaller mirrorless systems - but I've been shooting the D850 since it was first available and Nikon now for years. www.flickr.com/photos/stephenstarkman
Thanks Stephen! Your experiences are great to hear. I am very interested in your comment reagrding future compatibility - what makes you think this? I am considering the Tamaron 24-70 and 70-200 G2 pairing as they are getting exceptional reviews. Would be good to hear your thoughts on these?
Hi James! I can't speak specifically about the two Tamrons, and yes, they are getting great reviews!. I've had issues twice with 3d party lenses which worked wonderfully with my then current Nikon body, but failed to work when I upgraded to a new Nikon body. One required a firmware update (had to send the lens away) and the other had to be adjusted using the manufacturer's dock (neither cost me anything other than time - my brick and mortar dealer is fantastic about customer service). My 35 Sigma Art lens doesn't seem to nail focus as consistently as I think it should - but that could be sample variation too. No matter, the D850 has a fantastic sensor - it's very demanding of the best possible performance (both optically and in terms of mechanical AF). My results with the two Nikons (24-70E and 70-200E) is nothing less than stellar, especially the 70-200. And corner to corner performance is also critical for my needs (landscape etc.). BTW, with the D850 it really is important to fine tune AF for each lens you have if you shoot wide open or nearly so. I found the built in system in the 850 not very good at this, so I'm fine tuning manually. Happy to share files (NEF) if I can be of any help. Keep up the great work online here. It's very appreciated.
Hi Stephen, thank you very much for sharing your incredible insights. I have made a decision - I have gone for the 24-70 Tamaron G2. I am slightly worried about what you said about compatability but the price for the lens was too good to pass up compared to the Nikon (£800 cheaper). The reviews I have read suggest there is not an £800 difference between then. My budget at the moment just wouldn't allow me to strech to the Nikon unfortunately. I'll hopefully be able to share my thoughts on the lens soon. Not decided on the 70-200 as yet. Really interesting about the AF - if you wouldn't mind sharing those files it would be great to take a look? Thanks very much
Hi James, I'm sure you'll be fine with the Tamron 24-70 - I also hear it's a very good lens. I would give serious thought to the Nikon 70-200E though. There's nothing out there in that range that's as close in terms of resolution and performance. I can happily make some samples available but I'll need your email address to send you a link. At the end of this post I'll put a link to a review which compares the Tamron 70-200 with Nikon and Canon with meaningful numeric measurements. Very reputable source. Worth a read. Have you done autofocus fine tuning previously? www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/04/mtf-lens-tests-of-the-new-tamron-70-200-f2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-g2/
Oh, and of course, you'll make great images no matter what lens you choose. I just like to make the best informed purchase decisions I can, even if I choose to spend less!
Excellent video, James and it was interesting to hear your thoughts on that lens. I always avoided the idea of using superzooms because I worried about comprimising optical quality. However I did a nosy on Ken Wheeler's video (i.e. the angry photographer) when he did a quick review on all the Nikon lenses and gave the 28-300mm VR a thumbs up, which if you watch his channel, is rare for him with superzooms lol. Great video, anyway James, look forward to your next one.
Thank you Kenny! I will check that video out. There's no doubt it's a good lens, probably the best superzoom there is, I just feel it can't compete with lenses that specialise in a specific smaller focal range...I could well end up being massively wrong though haha 😂
Drooping problem? let's hope it is your tripod. That isn't the lens. If you want a good lens, buy Sigma. The 150-600 sigma is a must. But you will need a good heavy tripod.
Don't think it is the tripod Haggis but I may be wrong - i'm pretty sure its the lens when it's fully extended. The center of gravity moves forward where as most heavily lens have a lens mount to deal with the problem. I actually already have the 150-600 from Sigma, it's a super lens for wildlife shooting. I really don't use it as much as I should
I also have the D850 and the 28-300mm lens. I always pack the lens whenever I travel (I still do) along with a few other primes. But outside of travel, I almost never touch that lens.~~
Good for you James. I think with the 24 to 70 mm and the 700 to 200 mm you would see an amazing improvement in sharpness and over all quality of an image. I am also stuck on a lens that is not what I need it to be The canon 28 to 135mm . But it is the first lens I reach for every single time. Its hard to change even when you know its for the better.
Thanks for the different view on this lens! Much appreciated. I thought about getting this lens for vacation as it is obviously the best in the segment, still even with Tamron doing fine with newer super zooms. But, i will do as you. Go with a split. Tamron 15-30 is totally outstanding as well as Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art. Any 70-200 will also be excellent but i chosed Sigma. With a full frame, D810 and my Crop, D500, The range is all the way from 15 - 320/2.8. It is more expensive but i also will get better quality and is prepared when i upgrade the cameras one day. I should also mention Nikon lenses are better calibrated from factory while Sigma and Tamron needs some parameter adjustment for their auto focus to work accurately. Do this before you really need the lenses. It is really, really worth it.
Bernt Olov Hellström thanks for sharing your insights Bernt. The 28-300 is a great travel lens but it comes with quality compromises. Good luck with your choices, I'm sure they'll work out great for you 🙂
What a stupid comment about the purpose of this Lens. It is like AK47 or M16, not as powerful as M60 or as light as hand gun. It does all the job just fine. What a Wimp, rubber parts are normal to wear and it is replaceable within minutes.
I have the exact set up as you (in this video) and I completely understand what your talking about. I did a live steam today of the Canadian Snowbirds flyby and was not happy with the quality... I know it would have been much better/sharper with the 70-200 f2.8... always something I want... thanks for the video
Oh man, I empathize SO completely. Went through the exact same break up with a similar lens with my canon recently. It was unusable at range, all around soft... yea. Funny when your camera sensor reveals how bad your glass is.
If you are using a tripod for landscape or in a studio using flashes and softboxes, reflectors, umbrellas ecetera big fast lenses are no better. The Nikon 28-300mm for fx full frame and it's dx equivalent 18-200mm lens are top notch. Have you heard of John Gravett professional landscape photographer and seen his photos ? I have seen him use the 28-300mm lens on one of his Lakeland Photographic landscape workshops. Brilliant six day workshop with a master at work.
I've not see that but I'll look into it. I don't regret ditching the 28-300 to be honest. The lens I've switched to are better but that's just my opinion :-)
I disagree with you. Photography is not like buying a car. It is your story you tell through an image. Pixel peeping is not an issue and it wasn’t in the age of film. But it is your choice ultimately.
Thanks fro the heart felt confession...while I do like super zooms, I am not a fan of the compromises (as you mentioned) that you have to make...I am in the process of making the same choice as you are at the moment...which manufacturer do I go with to cover that zoom range. If money was NO OBJECT, I would keep everything OEM and go with NIKON...that being said, I don't have that kind of cash lying around...for the price of the latest version of the 70-200 f/2.8 NIKON, I can get the 24-70mm f/2.8 AND 70-200mm f/2.8 from TAMRON (both the latest G2 version) at the same time! It's not like I would be skimping out on quality either!
Obsidian17 thanks! Yeah the g2 range is superb. I actually think the difference between them and the Nikons is negligible, certainly not enough to justify the price difference. You won't regret going with the G2 loadout
This lens is not for mere endless pixel peeping. If you strain at a gnat, with a 46mp sensor, to compare it to the 70-200 FL, or an incredibly sharp prime, you will find subtle differences, but it has more than enough IQ for actual photography.
Sigma are excellent, feel like quality, look at the detail here with the 150-600 i1255.photobucket.com/albums/hh633/Nikonhaggis/Nikon%20favorites/DSC_0098c_zpstjysrzyo.jpg
You mean 3 lenses ......by the way keep this lens, until you bought your 3 pie in the sky chocolate unicorn lenses, as in several years you’ll buy yet another megapixel dream body, and need to get 12 primes, because you’ll once again be over those 3 lenses because they just don’t seem to be up to it yet once again. On and on and on and on it goes. My advice, just take stunning photos.....relax on the gear, or the mega megapixel games. Be better than that.
Exactly. I think we have all seen photographers with the new latest and greatest, and couldn't shoot worth a plug nickel, and then other photographers with run-of-the-mill gear that always seemed to get absolutely stunning photographic art. Knowlege, experience, and imagination will trump gear every time.
Jay Maisel’s lens of choice. He still uses it on the z cameras with an adapter.
His work is ,how we say, legendary?
Who?
Thanks, James, you are right about it being a compromise. I have a similar love/hate with the 28-300. I think you'll ultimately regret it, namely because you notice those defects more than your customers ever would, and other defects are auto-correctable in post. I guess it all depends on where and what you shoot. If you hike into the mountains, like I do, the 28-300 is invaluable... Awesome cloud coverage on the distant peak-zoom in and get it. Nice flowers leading up to that peak-zoom out and get that too. A bear walks on the trail for 5 seconds, you can get that too. I'd have to do 2 lens changes and would probably a)never end up changing because of the hassle, and/or b)miss the bear entirely. Let us know how it goes.
Thanks James! Yeah I definitely miss its flexibility. I think it comes into it's own when travelling, I haven't actually done that much lately so I guess the real test will be on my next trip. Currently using the Tamaron 24-70 g2 and I'm very impressed with the quality, but yeah not same flexibility. Thanks for sharing your thoughts 👍
I'm of a similar mind, as I've been using the 28-300mm on my D750 for 4 years, and although it can be soft on some shots, many many are spot on, giving wonderful detail! With that said, if I'm using the lens at low light, I'll switch it out to my 7-200mm VR, but the 28-300mm has still given me some nice blue hour shots, by just using exposure compensation. Overall, the 28-300mm is as you say, a fabulous travel lens, and for the most part I use a carbon fibre gimbal head, so even with the lens extended, I get no creep. I've never come across the focus rubber issue you mention on my lens, there again, I don't travel the world either, and just deal with the temperatures of North America!
I came here because I just upgraded to the d850, and when I pixelpipe, that's when I notice the softness to a LITTLE degree. Depending on your priority you either accept it or not. There're many factors that come into play in choosing a gear, for me the 28-300mm is just like the d850, jack of all trade and master of all..it's image output sharp. Other factors like weight, number of lens to travel with, filter diameter size ( 77mm is so common ), VR, durability ( I have dropped mine a couple of times, yet my test shows it's still sharp and no issues ), and best of all PRICE makes this lens a regrettable decision to let go off.
In my case, I have the 16-35mm( for landscape ) and 28-300mm ( every other thing lens ).
To complement the 28-300mm, I got 2 primes - 50mm f1.8 ( group shot, protrait full length, low light photography, video ) and the 105mm f2.8d macro ( macro && head shot portrait ). With 4 lens, you've got all genre covered - 28-300mm (300mm) for action and sports in DX Crop mode.
or you can have the lenses mounted on several different body cameras and lug them around. That would save you some time.
@@woodedape I’m guessing you don’t do much hiking....
Hi James. My recommendation for you is to use Nikkor f1.8G primes (20mm, 35mm, 50mm). I would also highly recommend the Tamron 70-200mm G2. It's a superb lens and it's really not worth spending a fortune on the latest Nikkor version. I use these lenses on a D810 36mp camera and they work fantastically. Wishing you good luck in your next purchases.
We all know, if we are honest, that modern cameras alongside decent lenses do the job: it's the photographer that makes the image. Pixel peeping is almost a pathology. I have it too... What’s more important when moving around: the flexibility to take the shot, to make the image? Or switching out primes, while losing the moment?
Thanks for watching. I get your point but since filming this I have to say getting rid of this lens has been one of the best choices I've ever made. I genuinely feel the quality of my images has improved significantly and its changed the way I shoot (slow methodical thoughtful, rather then run and gun etc). The 28-300 is still great though and will suit many people perfectly
The only time I'm pixel peeping is when I am using a macro lens to do copy work. For that very reason I still shoot about a third of my pictures using film cameras or a D3 with af-d lenses.
I know it's late. But a very popular walk-around lens is the Nikkor 24-85mm, it's very sharp, not too cheap, not too expensive. Then you can pair that with a Telephoto lens (70-200, etc.)
I totally don't disagree with his opinion, but the renowned camera critic, Ken Rockwell, took some outstanding photos with this lens, using the new Nikon d780. Go to this website, www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d780.htm Scroll down to see his outstanding images with the 28-300. No photoshop or post processing of any kind. Jpeg images straight out of the camera. I was shocked. The reason I didn't buy this lens for my d750 was the concerns that James brought out on this video. However, after looking at Rockwell's photos, I might pick this lens up.
Rockwell shows what a really good photographer can do with even average gear.
If your goal is to fully justify the d850 sensor then go for a prime lens. May be a 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 will be a good combination. Even the best 24-70 can’t match these lenses in picture quality
so use it on a camera body with less resolution, be happy......
James!
What did you find instead?
Thanks for this video.....in fact, because of some web's when you put the Q what is the best lens for Nikkon ...I started looking... maybe to dismantling my travel gear set... which is Nikkor 24-70 2.8(82mm)''' welded'' to D850 and 70-200 II 2.8 ''welded'' to another D850 and monopod from Gitzo... yes bit heavy but... I love the sweet weight.....But looks like recently I started having ideas'' maybe'' something for change.... then I found your review....So .... just keep maintaining the ''weld''? .... my wife helping me on travels too because I hung on her neck D750 mostly with 50mm or Tamron 15-30 2.8 G2 and Tamron 35 1.4.... Yes is weight, yes I don't need to pay an extra pass for the gym... yes I have to leave a few things at home instead.... yes I have the best gear with me....
What did You find?
So what are you going to replace that lens with? You will need several primes to cover that range which means extra size and weight when traveling. I travel a lot and am considering the 28-300 for my Nikon D7100. I have a 12-24 for ruins and temples and a 105 for portraits which I will leave home when on the road.
Mike Ikeda hi Mike, I've replaced this lens with the 24-70 Tamaron G2 and 70-200 Nikon f4. A bit heavier collectively but the quality is miles better 👍
MIke, I also have a D7100, and my lenses are the 10-24DX, 35G (1.8), 50G (1.8), 105 (2.8), and the 28-300. As you say with the 28-300 and a wide zoom you have the range covered. I always bring the 10-24 for interiors, landscapes and macro on things that don't frighten. If you and I had FXs we could leave the wide zoom at home as well. (But I would miss the 10-24's macro.)
As you have the 105 you know the creamy bokah it provides; and you would be leaving that at home with the 105. With wide angles, you're never going to have creamy bokah, but the 10-24 is not bad when shoved up the nose of a plant or whatever.
The 28-300 gets you the shot you might have missed, but as James says, it will always be missing something and be more like a snapshot. It will tell the story but it won't be eye candy. From 35mm days I also have a 70-200 f/4-5.6 AF-D that at 200 mm has the creamy bokah and just kills the 28-300. (In fact, it's the lens that taught me bokah exists as a lens quality.) If I am taking primes and think I'll want a 200 that goes in the bag instead of the 28-300.
On the other hand, when I bring the primes and start swapping lenses again and again it just drives my wife up the wall and kills the fun. She also hates it when she says, "Oh look, can you get that shot? And I reply, "wrong lens on and it'll be gone by the time I swap."" But when we get home she loves the eye candy of the primes (and the 10-24). On the other hand when wanting to just enjoy and record the trip the 28-300 is perfect.
Your lens looks like it is worn out. There is no paint left on it. How has it been stored? Did you see a serviceman before you ditched it? I use a Tamron 28-300 VC. Much lighter than the Nikon, not the same quality as my primes, but I love that lens, it's a travel lens that gives more than OK pictures.
I have a Tamrom 70-300 as well, and it is sharper than the Nikon 70-300 VR.
No question about it, your lens is broke or the optics are misaligned. the Nikon 28-300 is one of the sharpest lenses out there, its well ducumented. its insainly sharp! Constantly out performs my 2 Primes and my 24-70 on a D750 tested them @ F8 This is my go to lens for most things. and its not a compromise I get better Image quality. many magnitudes better than my 24-70 less fringeing and sharper across the whole image and should be absoloutly AWESOME on a D850.
I couldn't agree more. I just finished an exhaustive comparison between my 70-200VRI and my 28-300 on my D810, and the 28-300 performed exceptionally well. Resolution at 200mm was as good, if not better than the 70-200. The 70-200 had a bit better contrast, but even the standard wall test showed no resolution differences. I compared multi-image panoramas, and the 28-300 had virtually identical results. What was really shocking was the extra detail available when I compared resolution of 300mm shots versus 200mm shots cropped to the same image size. The 300mm shots showed much higher resolution, indicating there was little resolution loss at the maximum zoom. As a comparison, I shot the same sets of images with my Panasonic GX85 m43, and it wasn't even in the same league.
I am currently in a similar position. I used to own a D5200, with Sigma 17-70mm and a Tamron 70-300mm. I don't have those anymore, I have a D780 body instead and that without a single lens. With that said, I am currently looking into what might work and yet still be cheap enough as I can not afford the real high end lenses. I was looking into options regarding super zooms because it would be handy and much cheaper. But more and more I fear I should rather look at smaller zoom ranges. Unfortunately the Sigma 17-70mm isn't a option for my current camera or I'd buy that without a second thought, loved that lens and i'm really unhappy I had to get rid of it because of it not being compatible with this new body.
With you having a similar camera, can you give me some advice regarding these lenses? Perhaps mention what you have currently?
Hi, Is it a good idea to ditch my kit lenses -AF-P DX 18-55mm 3.5/5.6 VR and AF-P 70-300mm 4.5/6.3 VR ED- for a: FX AF-S 28-300mm 3.5/5.6 VR (offer for $250 USD)?
I have a D3400 a 50mm 1.8G and a DX 35mm 1.8G
I like taking photos anywhere and I mainly shoot animal (birds, dogs, etc.)
I use this lens with my D810 and have gotten the sharpest landscape photo's I've ever gotten of Big Bend National Park with it and, some of those even handheld. Most of my pics are sharp from front to back. I love this lens!
Compared to what?
LAZY DOG YeahI’d like to know too. All superzooms are compromised from the get-go. It’s inevitable given their optical design complexity. Great travel lenses though. Heck, I wish it were otherwise, but if the 28-300 genuinely excelled IQ wise, the market for more costly lenses would have taken a serious hit. It hasn’t, and we all know why.
Thanks for sharing. Very informative video, if a bit depressing. Just bought the 28-300 to save having to swap lenses during hiking trips. I'll be using it with a D7200, so hopefully the limitations won't be that noticeable until I upgrade to a full frame.
MafiaProtectron thanks! Don't worry, the superzoom is a superb lens. So no need to regret your choice, it will serve you fantastically and be perfect for hiking 👍
Hello!!! I just want to know, Did you buy the two lens and worth it the change? are you still thinking is better have 2 lens than 1?
Hi, I went with two lens. If quality is priority then 2 is the way to go, if convince is priority then 1 is way to go 👍
@@JamesBrewphoto thank you very much!!
Hello. Just found your video as I was looking into this lens. What lens did you ultimately get?
I bought two - Nikon 70-200 f4 & Tamron 24-70 f2.8. Both are fantastic!
so which two lenses did you decide to work with?
James, great blog for the bit more experienced photographer. I’ve been happy with a 24-105 and a 70-200. I also carry a 400 prime for wildlife. One thing to consider - don’t feel you have to avoid overlap between the lenses. I love that I have about 35 mm between the two main lenses I use. You simply do not want to be changing lenses that much should you want to zoom in or out a bit more. Best, Dave
What is the fastest, sharpest, 28 to 200 mm lens in your opinion?
It's been 2 years now - how do you feel about having ditched this lens?
Since it's been two years now I imagine you've had the retrospect...
Curious to know if you still feel the same way...
I made the right decision 👍
I'm trying to move to FX from DX and am a street and wildlife photographer. Would you recommend getting this as an initial investment for a guy trying to shift to FX?
whakabuti absolutely i would! This is a very good purchase that will stand the test of time. Combined with a wide angle and a telephoto these 3 lenses are everything you need.
Thanks for the reply! If I may trouble you once more, would you recommend this over a 24-120mm f/4? It's just that I'd be intimidated taking the 28-300mm on the crowded streets etc. It's seems super chunky and I wouldn't want it to get damaged or give me away for candid street photography due to its size. :) Haha opportunity cost is such a big problem for photographers since it's such an expensive hobby!
@@whakabuti , I used the 24-120 for two weeks on a D750, it was very nice, and easy to handle. I also just upgraded to the D850, and with its large files, I am going to stay away from the super zoom. I have the DX 18-300 on a D7500, and although it gets the job done, it's a little soft.
I can understand you ditching it for superior lenses. I have the D850 and have the Nikon 24-70 2.8, Tamron 15-30mm and Tamron 70-200. But i really enjoy using the 28-300 as a walk around lens when out messing around with the family. Or just when i want to take one lens out. I think it still has its place for convenience. I also find the image quality still pretty good. My copy is very sharp on the D850.
would you say the same about this lens for a z6?
would you say its sharper than the 28-300?
The Z6 resolution is a bit more forgiving so, yes this lens might be more suitable for that camera imo
yeah, unfortunately you have gotten on to the 'gear acquisition treadmill;' that lens most probably suited your previously owned lower MP camera body superbly
I have the D850 and the 28-300 like you. The only difference is I think this lens is better than very sharp using the D850. Maybe you are more discriminating than I am. But I’m very happy with the quality and to replace this lens with 2 is not very appealing.
Harvey B. Well I hope you’re right because I just bought it online (for my D850) (only have the 24-70 atm)
@@eastender_ what happened? do you like the 28-300? use it the most now? thanks.
@@sean7193 yeah, it’s pretty much the only lens I use. But that’s mostly because I take photos at 300mm so much.
I use the other lens (24mm) whenever I do a bit of photo work for a relative’s architecture firm (interiors, so need as wide angle as possible).
Hello James. I'm curious. What cameras were you using with the 28-300mm lens before you bought the Nikon D850?
KB Med Hi there, i was using the d600 and d750 bodies with this. The d750 is an awesome camera 👍
Hello again. I'm just starting out and I was pleased with some of the pictures you showed using that lens (Kilimanjaro and the seal). Considering that I will be using my new D750 for similar purposes and the fact that I've no plans to upgrade to a D850 in the near future, would you say that a 28-300mm should pair up nicely with my D750?
James, I think I understand your point. You can't have everything in one lens, if this 28-300 were exceptional no one would wear prime lenses. Flexibility versus quality, that is the point. And here evaluating this margin is very complicated. It is obvious that with a trained eye you like others are going to see the defects of an all-terrain lens but these flaws ruin the photo? Those who see the photo tell you, "bahh you are a comfortable o lazy man who uses an all-terrain lens". I think not, that the problem is that one tends to see the optical defect over the fact of the shoot. If every gram counts on a travel, maybe this 28-300 is irreplaceable. Or accept the challenge of carrying only one lens just 50 or a 35 or a 28 prime lens. Thanks.
Really interesting dilemma, which I shared. In the end I tried the Nikon 24-120 VR, (latest version) Not quite the reach but as a travel lens, in my view outstanding, compact and well made. In a trip across China it covered all but a very few extreme shots. The bigger dilemma is that now I have started using a Fuji mirrorless, the X H1 in my case. Fuji lenses seem to be in a different class to Nikon, vastly superior and the combination of better glass and a more compact weather sealed body provided the perfect, lighter travel kit. Hardly ever use my Nikon D750 now sell it?.
Do you want my Fuji Im using it as a Door Stop Because its vastly inferior to My Nikon Lenses.
I used to have an old Nikon D50 camera with an 18-200mm. I recently bought a Fuji X-T3 and I can't find any lenses that give a lot of this kind of flexibility, just the 16-80mm lens which isn't great. I wonder why they stopped making these in modern cameras while they were very prevalent 15 years ago!
I have a D850 and I love this lens. I probably wouldn’t use it professionally, but I get consistently sharp photos at 300mm.
It's a good lens but certainly my version was not very good in the telephoto range. Maybe I just got unlucky
James Brew does that actually happen tho?
People put too much importance on equipment while saying equipment doesn't matter...
A Nikon 24-85 & Tamron 100-400 could be a solution and save your gym fees?
LOL same here this lens is terribly soft on the d850 i have to ditch it :)) let me know if you came across a better option!
The Tamaron 24-70 g2 is pretty awesome so far 👍
@@JamesBrewphoto not enough reach though
@@Rammykazemi I also use the 70-200 Nikon f4. Great combo
@@JamesBrewphoto still not enough reach LOL
@@JamesBrewphoto I just did a personal test and we are BOTH WRONG! the lens itself is not a problem at all. i tested it on the D800 and the D850. both files are JUST AS SHARP when it was on tripod. so problem is camera shake. sensor shows the shake MUCH more on the D850.
Understand totally about your thoughts on the super zoom lens James I owed the 18-200 mm nikon lens and I also ended up not using it much I think it’s been 2 years or more so maybe I should get it sold, the lenses your thinking of buying both the 24-70 and the 70-200 are superb glass very sharp I don’t think you’ll go far wrong with either , good luck James look forward to you results with either, best wishers Shaun.
Just be amazing and use a D700. The images particularly for Humans... is the best there is.
Thanks for the down to earth review. I was considering the 28-200 lens for my Nikon D750 but now I am inclined to get another D750 body. I will mount my Tamron 24-70 G2 on one and Tamron 70-200 G2 on the other. A little bulky but will have peace of mind.
You are one of the very rare native english speakers who are able to pronounce "Nikon" correct, so that was a huge plus for me in this video :D
For the new lenses I'd rather look at Sigma and Tamron than Nikon, because what ever advantage the Nikon lenses are supposed to have is overshadowed by the huge amount of saved money with the other two brand (and their lenses are also not cheap).
Cheers from Germany =)
Haha - your the second person to comment on that. I'm going to be super aware of how I say that word from now on. Yes, the Tamaron G2 pairing of the 24-70 and 70-200 is looking like a very tempting option. They look as good as the more expensive Nikon versions from all the research I've done 👍
Good luck on the "faster glass" option. I bought the 28-300 for a D850 because my (2) f2.8 lenses are very heavy. Yes, they are sharp, but i can shapen the superzoom and not have back problems.
Heyy…!! If I compare with this two lens like Nikon 24-120mm f/4 and 28-300mm, which lens picture quality is sharp?
Not used the 24-120 so can't really answer your question im afraid
Had same grip issue on my 70-300 lens.
If you are a pixel peeper then you will find fault with this or any lens. This is actually considered one of Nikon’s sharpest zooms next to the 24-85mm G VR. In real world usage this lens is outstanding. If you plan to do a 1:1 crop on a D850 I would suggest most lenses will fall short.
Thx for sharing your thoughts. On the longer end you might want to check out the Nikon 70-200 f4 paired with x1.4 TC which even wide open delivers superb optical performance in a small and lightweight package for landscape / nature photographers. Good trade off between speed and portability plus VR.
Thanks very much! Yes that's one i'm currently look at. Looks like a good choice and I like the additional TC to give it that extra range too 👍
Great video James, I love hearing about people´s experiences with their equipment and the advantages and disadvantages, I have been thinking about getting another lens for a while, but it is a really big decision, at the moment, I only have an 18 - 55mm lens, what would you suggest?
Thanks Benn. I think it depends on the speed and quality of that 18-55 lens. It may well be worth investing in some f2.8 glass. These lens tend to produce superior images and also hold their long term value quite well. I'm looking at a 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 pairing. Still researching though
Fair points! I'm also in the market for a pair of Nikon lenses. I'd be interested to hear what you come up with!
Brian Maneely cheers Brian. 1st lens purchased....tamron 24-70 g2...video coming soon
Very interesting video. I don’t know enough about lenses to make an educated comment but I do enjoy hearing about people’s choice of lenses and the good, bad and ugly things about them. I look forward to hearing about your research and what you choose. 👍
Thank you very much Chris 👍
Have the D850 and D810 lately and some lenses really suck or need callibration. The D850 shows how good or bad your glass is for sure.
I really noticed this yesterday while shooting photos of jets at an Airshow. Even though I was shooting f8 at 1/8000 of a second (on a D800 body), the photos lacked the sharpness I got using a Tamron 70-300 on a D750.
It's a great lens for photojournalism, as long as the images are solely for the internet, but terrible for high quality prints.
Informative James, thanks. I was thinking of buying this for travel, however not now. I own the D850 and pair it with the Tamron 24-70mm and Nikon 80-200mm f2.8. I'll stick with those. Thanks Rick from Aus.
Rich Ita cheers Rich! I've just bought myself the tamron 24-70. Super impressed so far. Just put up a video with my first impressions
How long have you been taking pics? 😁 Everybody knows super zooms are a compromise, and it is a fact that has always been known.
Best travel lens 24-120 f4.......in dx mode up to 180mm. More than enough. For the rest 200-500
Have that same one as my do everything walk around shooter. I don't enlarge or print my images, just post on social media or enjoy on my computer screen. Good enough for me for my real, not imagined needs.
The rubber grip thing... my 70-200 f2.8 VRII does the same and not even in hot climates. Use it for an hour and its slipping about. So probably just a Nikon lens thing.
Wow - so it's not just me then! Must be a Nikon problem. It's really unforgiveable given the price of the gear. A big minus for buying Nikon again for me
James Brew I have the 18-300 and the same problem with the rubbers, only 2 years old as well. The white paint has come off the lens where it says M-AF and its not even raised lettering so once it’s gone, it’s gone.. think I am going to try a bit of white enamel.
I’d highly recommend a 70-200 Tamron 2nd hand, great value for a solid, sharp (heavy) amazing lens. I have the 28-300 too on the D810 and your points are valid although it’s still capable of some great shots and hugely versatile. Happy shooting!
Tamron 70-200 is cheaper but Nikon 70-200 f4 is sharper along the focal ranges.
Suggest me bro. Im gonna upgrade my dx camera to fx. Right now im stuck with the thought whether to buy nikon d750 or canon 6d mark ii. If nikon which lens to prefer 28-300 or 24-120mm
Out of those two I'd probably get the 28-300 👍
I kept both my 24-120mm F4 lens and my 28-300mm lens as when I need the reach, the longer lens works and gets more detail and higher pixel count on images or subjects as I don't need to crop in from shorter lens. I don't like to switch lens outdoors so these lenses are good. I use the 24-120mm f4 for faster focusing ability over the other lenses. Both of the lenses have decent enough sharpness for my purposes. I also have an ultrawide Tokina Pro Opera lens 16-28mm FF lens for wider landscape and realty.
wow congrats. i realize how much i love my prime lens
I had the 18-200mm VR Nikon superzoom for DX. It was not the sharpest lens (on my D90), however, as an amateur, it did what I needed it to do and I loved the convenience.
Now, shooting FX, I have the Nikon 24-85mm VR. It's sharp as hell but the vignetting is ridiculous and doesn't go away until you're at f/8. Prior to buying the lens, I did not see or read anything about how bad the vignetting is.
If your style and subject matter is conducive, you're better off saving your money and shooting with the old manual focus Nikon AI and AI-s lenses. If you shoot landscapes, why do you 'need' autofocus?
Think I'd be tempted to try out a prime lens James. They tend to be quicker and sharper due to their build and lower aperture capability. Some good deals out there on second hand equipment at the moment. For landscape I picked up a NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED for £350 or perhaps something that's a little more flexible like the Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM ART. Which can be used for a number of things ( Street/Portrait/Landscape) and is good in low light.
Quite a few people commented just how sharp this lens was for the price point.
Good video James. Always interesting to hear the reasons for changing. The rubber grip thing was also an issue on my old DX 18-105 lens. I put it down to the plastic body combined with the rubber grip (but not sure if your superzoom is a plastic body so that could be completely wrong. When I upgraded to FX I went for the 16-35 f/4 and the 70-200 f/2.8 (love them both). As I rarely shoot between 36 and 69 mm anyway I saved money, space and weight and didn't get the 24-70, just a 50mm f1/8 prime for the rare occasions when I need something in the middle. I'll look forward to seeing what you buy and what your feelings are about the quality when you've used them.
Thanks Ralph. So the rubber grip issue is not just me getting unlucky then. Must be a Nikon issue, which is really poor really. Yeah I do like the idea of a prime covering that mid focal range. I will do some research into this as a potential option. Your setup sounds great 👍
Let me help you with something. I have one of these and gave it to my girlfriend. She took it on our last trip to see the petrified forest and death valley and the alabama hills. I took my d850 and a nikon 24-70 that I used most of the time and a tamron 70-200 lens that are the cats meow for the greatest lenses ever to grace a d850 and i also took a macro 105 nikon. Well let me tell you. I started to notice it when going through the airport. My camera bag with these lenses liked to killed me from the weight. And when getting to death valley and the other places we went. The weight became unbearable. My girl friend with her only one nikon 28-300 lens and took photo's just as devastatingly great as mine with my much superior lenses. Her camera bag was so so light with that one lens. and that lens took great macro with boca. I am now going to buy another nikon 28-300 as a camera lens. Yes yes yes if i am going to do a portrait shoot near home I will have my better zooms. But if I am traveling and want the greatest lens (for my taste) fantastic photographs I never in my life want to suffer like I did under weight of those three lenses I took with me on our last trip. Sure I got great photographs with those three lenses but the sheer physical horror of toteing all those heavy lenses around on such a long hot trip. I will never do that again. It will be this nikon 28-300 and I will throw my very light tamron 45mm 1.8 vibration controlled boca friendly lens in the bag if i want night shots or portraits. Please note these two lenses will be my travel lens. For professional portraits here near home I also use and 85mm lens. But for travel and comfort my high end lenses will be safe queens till I get back. And I am going to be happy as a pig in slop with my light weight, easy dream to carry nikon 28-300 and my 45mm tamron.
For a side note: For one of her photo's she got down on level with a lizard sitting on top of a petrified log and got a macro photo of that colorful lizard that was so sharp it was absolutely unbelievably incredible. It was so sharp you could see the tiniest details of it's eyes and skin. It is so sharp I only wish i could past it here to let you see that I don't think any lens in the world could be as sharp, colorful and have such great boca as that 28-300 did on that lizard.
Hi. What were the two lenses you chose? I can't give your video for that, cheers
I went for the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 and Nikon 70-200 f4. Both superb!
Could you pls give me the lens . Im from Yorkshire and I also pronounce Nikon not Nikon .
I pronounce it a third way, Nikon
nickon, neekon or nyekon
@@charky6683 the first way
James, thank you for a very informative review. I don't have this lens but I was considering it for some landscape photography in the Adirondacks (NY). Thinking that this lens could replace my 24 - 70 and my 80-200 (2.8) to save substantial weight on my hikes. Like you, I recently upgrade to an 850 from a 500 so I would be in the same situation as you. This review was very helpful.
Dominic Uliano thank you very much Dominic! Glad you found this useful. Good luck with your lens choices 👍
I enjoy how you pronounce "Nikon"... I'm just learning on enjoying Nikon products myself. You are a great narrator !
Thanks Marc! Haha I've never given my pronouncing of the word much thought but I'm going to be super conscious of it from now on 😆
The high megapixels of the D850 does show up user faults as well. They require perfect handling .
So what lenses WOULD you recommend?
For landscape work - What I'm shooting with now - 14-30 f4, 24-70 f4, 70-200 f4
Finally you’ve seen the light 🤔
Well presented and argued I appreciate your honest point of view. Respect from Peter Bennett, Gippsland Lakes, Victoria Australia.
Thanks for this unbiased opinion; Very helpful.
Good video, makes absolute sense when you start talking about using the awesome D850.
Thanks Jason 👍
It's a fact this lens is not sharp anywhere when compared with a professional grade lens, also using it on a D850 is such a contradiction.
I agree which is pretty much the key thought of this video 👍
Does this mean that you are going to abandon (i.e ditch) all your, now disappointing, photos taken with this lens? If you are going to replace this lens start with the 24-120 mm f4 Nikkor.
it's always a compromise, but one thing that is not imho emphasized enough for people who get into this hobby new, such as me, is the fact that we are talking pros and cons and better/worse about the products which are in the top 10% of the quality available. Get a 18-300, 28-300, 18-200/400, whatever and go take photos, they will be stunning compared to 90% of the options available on the market(phones, compacts, 1" senzors etc etc). The reviewers (not particularly this one) make it seems like u gotta buy 5 lenses and sell your organs in the process. But you don't. You are gonna get 90% of the quality possible with 1 lens and more importantly, it will be in your backpack on every trip and in your hand everytime you have to snap a moment, and that's what counts, return home with a photograph, not with a missed opportunity. Then over time, as the author here ,you decide if you wanna 'upgrade' to dedicated lenses and which ones would suit your use, or you are just fine w the superzoom, since it will still nail all the IG/social media/family events/work presentations, smaller prints etc etc.
I've found this lens to be super sharp on my D750.
I went from this with a 7000 to a Sony RX10 iv - I was just fed up with the Nikon softness. The Sony is extraordinarily sharp - all the way up to 600mm. Only a 1 inch sensor which is not so good for fast/high iso in low light, hence I am considering adding an FF body (750/780?) for lower light. But I hate weight - I gave up photography for years due to the weight of 2 bodies, lenses, flash, tripod... There's just no perfect answer. The best I can do is try and predict my main uses and get a kit to fit that - #1 for me is "a kit that I will actually be bothered to use"!
I recently purchased the Z7 and used this with the fTZ adapter for portability as my 70-200 f2.8 is a beast to carry around. I agree, I became very disappointed with the quality of the images and started to wonder if it was the camera lol..
You wo'nt regret getting rid of that lens James. I have had a D850 since last September (5000+ shots) and I am finding that the older Ai-s Primes (50mm f1.8) Pancake (28mm f2.8) CRC are really surprising good on the larger sensor. I got rid of the Sigma 50mm Art as my go to 50mm in favour of the pancake (Japanese metal one) The 24-70mm E version is as good as all the primes though. The 70 -200 FL is the best lens I have ever shot with.
MrHookshanks reassuring to know! I've now pulled the trigger and new lens are incoming :-)
You are so right
Thank you 🙏
Lol it’s always been about the holy trinity. I wouldn’t expect any other Nikon Glass to perform on an 850. In fact I actually think that Nikon’s current best glass isn’t good enough to realise the potential of the 850.
You are questioning the quality of the Nikon lens, and then are considering a Sigma or Tamron??? I have used both (I owned the Tamron and borrowed the Sigma), In my beginning days of photography, graduating from point-and-shoot cameras, and even in those days considered both of those to be borderline crap. I now shoot with a Nikon Nikkor 18-300 3.5-6.3 DX VR ED lens. Prime lenses obviously have a bit of an edge over zooms, but if you haven't already, I would recommend at least road testing the above-mentioned zoom. And if you do decide to buy other zooms, if you are the quality photographer we all hope that you are, at least spend a bit more and buy a quality brand!
James, so refreshing to hear an honest and considered "gear" discussion on RUclips LOL! But you nailed it. The D850 raises the stakes (I know, I have one). Looking forward to seeing what you choose. Myself, for what it's worth, I stuck with Nikon (ensures compatibility with future bodies - don't ask how I know LOL) - 24-70 2.8 VR and 70-200 2.8E. The 70-200 is exceptional. Occasional use of either a 1.4TC III or Nikon 300PF makes it all happen. Downside? Cost, weight, changing lenses in the field. Currently I'm experimenting with smaller mirrorless systems - but I've been shooting the D850 since it was first available and Nikon now for years.
www.flickr.com/photos/stephenstarkman
Thanks Stephen! Your experiences are great to hear. I am very interested in your comment reagrding future compatibility - what makes you think this? I am considering the Tamaron 24-70 and 70-200 G2 pairing as they are getting exceptional reviews. Would be good to hear your thoughts on these?
Hi James! I can't speak specifically about the two Tamrons, and yes, they are getting great reviews!. I've had issues twice with 3d party lenses which worked wonderfully with my then current Nikon body, but failed to work when I upgraded to a new Nikon body. One required a firmware update (had to send the lens away) and the other had to be adjusted using the manufacturer's dock (neither cost me anything other than time - my brick and mortar dealer is fantastic about customer service). My 35 Sigma Art lens doesn't seem to nail focus as consistently as I think it should - but that could be sample variation too. No matter, the D850 has a fantastic sensor - it's very demanding of the best possible performance (both optically and in terms of mechanical AF). My results with the two Nikons (24-70E and 70-200E) is nothing less than stellar, especially the 70-200. And corner to corner performance is also critical for my needs (landscape etc.). BTW, with the D850 it really is important to fine tune AF for each lens you have if you shoot wide open or nearly so. I found the built in system in the 850 not very good at this, so I'm fine tuning manually. Happy to share files (NEF) if I can be of any help. Keep up the great work online here. It's very appreciated.
Hi Stephen, thank you very much for sharing your incredible insights. I have made a decision - I have gone for the 24-70 Tamaron G2. I am slightly worried about what you said about compatability but the price for the lens was too good to pass up compared to the Nikon (£800 cheaper). The reviews I have read suggest there is not an £800 difference between then. My budget at the moment just wouldn't allow me to strech to the Nikon unfortunately. I'll hopefully be able to share my thoughts on the lens soon. Not decided on the 70-200 as yet. Really interesting about the AF - if you wouldn't mind sharing those files it would be great to take a look? Thanks very much
Hi James, I'm sure you'll be fine with the Tamron 24-70 - I also hear it's a very good lens. I would give serious thought to the Nikon 70-200E though. There's nothing out there in that range that's as close in terms of resolution and performance. I can happily make some samples available but I'll need your email address to send you a link. At the end of this post I'll put a link to a review which compares the Tamron 70-200 with Nikon and Canon with meaningful numeric measurements. Very reputable source. Worth a read. Have you done autofocus fine tuning previously?
www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/04/mtf-lens-tests-of-the-new-tamron-70-200-f2-8-sp-di-vc-usd-g2/
Oh, and of course, you'll make great images no matter what lens you choose. I just like to make the best informed purchase decisions I can, even if I choose to spend less!
I use this on 850 and I don't like it. Issues with AF, sharpness, consistency and DOF
Excellent video, James and it was interesting to hear your thoughts on that lens. I always avoided the idea of using superzooms because I worried about comprimising optical quality. However I did a nosy on Ken Wheeler's video (i.e. the angry photographer) when he did a quick review on all the Nikon lenses and gave the 28-300mm VR a thumbs up, which if you watch his channel, is rare for him with superzooms lol. Great video, anyway James, look forward to your next one.
Thank you Kenny! I will check that video out. There's no doubt it's a good lens, probably the best superzoom there is, I just feel it can't compete with lenses that specialise in a specific smaller focal range...I could well end up being massively wrong though haha 😂
Drooping problem? let's hope it is your tripod. That isn't the lens. If you want a good lens, buy Sigma. The 150-600 sigma is a must. But you will need a good heavy tripod.
Don't think it is the tripod Haggis but I may be wrong - i'm pretty sure its the lens when it's fully extended. The center of gravity moves forward where as most heavily lens have a lens mount to deal with the problem. I actually already have the 150-600 from Sigma, it's a super lens for wildlife shooting. I really don't use it as much as I should
I also have the D850 and the 28-300mm lens. I always pack the lens whenever I travel (I still do) along with a few other primes. But outside of travel, I almost never touch that lens.~~
when lenses you use outside of travel
Good for you James. I think with the 24 to 70 mm and the 700 to 200 mm you would see an amazing improvement in sharpness and over all quality of an image. I am also stuck on a lens that is not what I need it to be The canon 28 to 135mm . But it is the first lens I reach for every single time. Its hard to change even when you know its for the better.
Yes totally agree Gary - changing the way you do things in Photography is very challenging. I keep wondering if i'm making the right choice here
You dont think much about the lenses when you click the shutter.
Thanks for the different view on this lens! Much appreciated. I thought about getting this lens for vacation as it is obviously the best in the segment, still even with Tamron doing fine with newer super zooms. But, i will do as you. Go with a split. Tamron 15-30 is totally outstanding as well as Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art. Any 70-200 will also be excellent but i chosed Sigma. With a full frame, D810 and my Crop, D500, The range is all the way from 15 - 320/2.8. It is more expensive but i also will get better quality and is prepared when i upgrade the cameras one day.
I should also mention Nikon lenses are better calibrated from factory while Sigma and Tamron needs some parameter adjustment for their auto focus to work accurately. Do this before you really need the lenses. It is really, really worth it.
Bernt Olov Hellström thanks for sharing your insights Bernt. The 28-300 is a great travel lens but it comes with quality compromises. Good luck with your choices, I'm sure they'll work out great for you 🙂
What a stupid comment about the purpose of this Lens. It is like AK47 or M16, not as powerful as M60 or as light as hand gun. It does all the job just fine. What a Wimp, rubber parts are normal to wear and it is replaceable within minutes.
I have the exact set up as you (in this video) and I completely understand what your talking about. I did a live steam today of the Canadian Snowbirds flyby and was not happy with the quality... I know it would have been much better/sharper with the 70-200 f2.8... always something I want... thanks for the video
Oh man, I empathize SO completely. Went through the exact same break up with a similar lens with my canon recently. It was unusable at range, all around soft... yea. Funny when your camera sensor reveals how bad your glass is.
If you are using a tripod for landscape or in a studio using flashes and softboxes, reflectors, umbrellas ecetera big fast lenses are no better.
The Nikon 28-300mm for fx full frame and it's dx equivalent 18-200mm lens are top notch. Have you heard of John Gravett professional landscape photographer and seen his photos ? I have seen him use the 28-300mm lens on one of his Lakeland Photographic landscape workshops. Brilliant six day workshop with a master at work.
I've not see that but I'll look into it. I don't regret ditching the 28-300 to be honest. The lens I've switched to are better but that's just my opinion :-)
wow you captured Sri Lanka...
I disagree with you. Photography is not like buying a car. It is your story you tell through an image. Pixel peeping is not an issue and it wasn’t in the age of film. But it is your choice ultimately.
Thanks fro the heart felt confession...while I do like super zooms, I am not a fan of the compromises (as you mentioned) that you have to make...I am in the process of making the same choice as you are at the moment...which manufacturer do I go with to cover that zoom range. If money was NO OBJECT, I would keep everything OEM and go with NIKON...that being said, I don't have that kind of cash lying around...for the price of the latest version of the 70-200 f/2.8 NIKON, I can get the 24-70mm f/2.8 AND 70-200mm f/2.8 from TAMRON (both the latest G2 version) at the same time! It's not like I would be skimping out on quality either!
Obsidian17 thanks! Yeah the g2 range is superb. I actually think the difference between them and the Nikons is negligible, certainly not enough to justify the price difference. You won't regret going with the G2 loadout
This lens is not for mere endless pixel peeping. If you strain at a gnat, with a 46mp sensor, to compare it to the 70-200 FL, or an incredibly sharp prime, you will find subtle differences, but it has more than enough IQ for actual photography.
I must comment, Nikon quality has gone down in recent years, unfortunately I have a few Nikon lenses. if not I would ditch Nikon.
Haggis Eater yeah they do seem overpriced at times. I think the 3rd party manufacturers have really upped their game lately
Sigma are excellent, feel like quality, look at the detail here with the 150-600 i1255.photobucket.com/albums/hh633/Nikonhaggis/Nikon%20favorites/DSC_0098c_zpstjysrzyo.jpg
Haggis Eater I've gone for the tamron 24-70 g2...video coming soon. Long lens research still ongoing
Tamron are good too, but don't feel as good as Sigma, Nikon can't even glue the serial numbers on without the numbers falling off.
Thanks I was going to purchase this lens but after this review changed my mind