Nikon 28-300mm VR Lens has one used it?

[mike55]

Hi
I am thinking to get the Nikon 28-300mm 3.5-5.6 VR lens and want to ask that if the lens is groan and fast at focusing and VR use in low light.
I have a Nikon D4 DSLR and want a all round use for work and leisure. I am on a budget and do not want to spend getting alot of money on lenses
That will be used a few times when out and about on places.

Mike

 

[DorkSterr]

Hey Mike.

I have the 28-300mm and have used it on the D4 and I can tell you for sure that it is a beauty to use on that body. Though the auto focus does lack quit a bit versus other lenses that I have used (keep in mind that those other lenses are f2.8) its still a very noticeable difference and hunts on occasion in very low light environment.

 

[mike55]

Hi

Thank you for your responds. I am thinking of getting the lens to use taking photos of places, and general use.

Mike

 

[molested_cow]

Well, the notion of having a FX camera body and "don't want to spend too much on lens" don't go together, especially on a pro body like the D4.

I have D700, bought a used 28-300mm recently. I can't say I've had enough time with it to tell you everything there is to say, but I am fairly happy with it given what it is.
Compared to my old AF 70-300mm ED lens that doesn't have VR, this one works great and I am able to take shots are relatively low shutter speed.

Image quality wise, it's decent. Not as sharp with my other F2.8 lens, but I think it acceptable on the D700. The D700 is only 12+mp. The D4 is much higher, so I am not sure how it will look.
Color is decent too. Not as rich as a F1.4 50mm, or vivid as a 105mm macro, but it nothing to complain about.

Definitely a very versatile lens with such wide focal length range. AF speed is indeed lacking, so don't expect to be capturing moving wildlife etc. In day light, I have no complain.

I just wish it can give shallower depth of field. Of course, I am asking for a larger aperture which means more money. For what I paid, I think this is quite a bargain. Bokeh is definitely better than the old ED 70-300(which was horrible), but it's also not pleasant enough.

The distortion is quite a lot on this lens, which can be adjusted using camera RAW's lens correction library. However, I notice that camera RAW's default lens correction setting for this lens can over correct the distortion, and I have to dial it back in occasions where there are straight lines as reference. So I guess this is more of a software issue, less to do with the hardware.

Lastly, I like the compact size(relatively to its focal length range), as well as the close focus distance. That alone allowed me to be able to take so many shots that I couldn't before. It's a good travel lens, but not something I will replace my other lens with. If you are looking for VERY SHARP image quality, you may be a little disappointed.

Basically, when using this lens, be prepared to be shooting at high ISO.


Edit: Just want to add that I think it's amazing that Nikon made this lens. In a way, packing 28-300mm while still giving such image quality is incredible. However, this isn't for people who are looking for the best image quality they can buy with money. For leisure, absolutely. For professional work, not quite.

 

[cgipson1]

I used to use the 28-300 on a D7000, and loved it. It was a great lens on that body. I then bought a D800, and the lens could no longer resolve well enough to give me the IQ is like to see. So I sold it.

But on a lower megapixel FX body... it might do fine!

I, like Molested Cow... am wondering why you would buy a $6k body.... and then put a lens like the 28-300 on it. But it should do ok on that body, if you are not shooting professionally with it.