Does the 28-300 compliment the 24-120F4

[Geoffc]

I currently have the 24-120F4 and it's a great lens. I actually chose it over the 24-70 as it's more versatile for my actual use with the extra range and VR. I'm sure at some point in the future I'll convince myself that I need the 24-70 My current dilemma is that we are planning a three week trip to the States next year and I'm trying to decide what gear to take. I could replace the 24-120, 70-200 2.8 and TC-20e with the 28-300. That said I just don't know how how much I would use the long end. Also 24mm is really useful on FX. And when I get back either the 28-300 or 24-120 would end up as my walkabout so one would stay at home all the time. I hate to think that the 24-120 wouldn't get much use as it's a great lens.

​I guess the question is, could you justify owning both lenses. If the 28-300 was so good I suppose the 24-120 could eventually turn into a 24-70 2.8. Decisions, decisions!!!

 

[WayneF]

My notion is that I could never consider replacing the 70-200, or the 24-70. I use those at every opportunity, it does not get better than that. IMO, these are the ultimate goal.

I don't know about the 28-300, but I do also have a 24-120 which is great for walk-around-all-day-with-one-lens, and it's very good on FX, but 24mm is a poor choice on DX, no wide angle.

The 28-300 is a 10x zoom range, where 24-120 is only 5x. 10x is really not a plus regarding optical quality. Neither of these is f/2.8, which helps when shooting at f/4, but we can't always have everything.

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

A lot of this decision depends on WHAT you are shooting. What part of the US are you going to and what are you planning to shoot.

 

[Geoffc]

Wayne I agree that for proper shooting the 70-200 / 24-70 are the top tools for the job. This is more of a walk around requirement.

To Don's point I don't actually know what I'll be shooting hence not knowing which tool to choose. If I'm honest there isn't actually a right answer to this question, I was just curious to see the responses.

 

[Mike150]

Can't comment on the lens issue, but would like to remind you that Washington DC is currently closed due to lack of interest.
​

 

[stmv]

Zooms lens are often compromises, although the Pro line gets very very close to Primes, but you have a D800,, which is a very exacting lens, and I am not sure that the consumer level 28-300 is sharp enough for that sensor, my travel kit for the D800,, is,, 20-35 2.8,, and 35-70 2.8 and believe or not,, the 80-400 for when I want ultimate zoom range. so,, while the 28-300 would be a nice all in one,, do you want to risk it for perhaps those once in a lifetime travel shots?

So I say rent it,, and try it out at least before committing.

 

[NVSteve]

To Don's point I don't actually know what I'll be shooting hence not knowing which tool to choose. If I'm honest there isn't actually a right answer to this question, I was just curious to see the responses.

But you still know which city you will be flying into and the general area where you will be spending your time, right? Living in the US southwest, I always have something that will get me at least 24mm. 28mm just doesn't cut it out here, IMO. If you could give us a better indication as to where you'll be, even in general terms, that would help us to understand your predicament & hopefully offer up some good ideas for a lens (or two).

 

[mr2_serious]

I think you should rent the 28-300 and try it at home first. The 24mm on the 24-120mm is a biggie. I think since you are shooting with the D800, even 120mm may be enough. You can crop in with the 36 mp camera. I rented the 14-24mm on one of my trips and that's what I did.

Just remember to enjoy your trip and don't let worrying about photography ruin it for you.

 

[BackdoorArts]

I had the 28-300 for a while and sold it because I thought I no longer "needed" it with all my other lenses. Kind of sorry I did, because it's a perfectwalking around on vacation lens. It's really closer to a 28-280mm, and is a little soft at the tips and wide open, but not so soft that it ever felt like it wasn't usable. At a Scott Kelby presentation he mentioned that when he goes on family vacations the only thing he takes are a D600 and the 28-300mm. I shot with it and an 18-105mm when I went to Yosemite on my D7000 and D90 (what I had at the time). They both worked extremely well. On a D800 I think it would be a great vacation lens and have had my eyes open for another at a good price.

For me, it's a one trick pony - a vacation/walkaround lens. If I have the luxury to carry a small bag then the 16-35mm, 24-85mm and 70-200mm f4 are what I take. But if I were more concerned with space and being able to enjoy family time while capturing great images then the D800 & 28-300mm would be perfect.

 

[Geoffc]

I'm planning to fly to Salt Lake, get an RV, do a loop of Yellowstone, back past Salt Lake to Bryce Canyon. From there we go to Vegas and get a car. Then it's Death Valley, Yosemite and finish in San Francisco. We are staying for several days in most places and spending 3 weeks in total.

I have the 16-35 for wide angle so that's covered. I'm happy that the 28-300 is not a pro lens as I used an 18-200 on my DX gear for years. Whilst not perfect these super zooms do a more than ok job, especially if you have light. I guess I'm just pondering if its actually worth buying a 28-300 given that I can't see me consciously choosing between it and the 24-120 afterwards unless the IQ difference is big , so one would get little use. For most of the time the 24mm is worth more than the 300mm. So I may already have what I need. Maybe I should just pack the 70-200 2.8 with my 2x teleconvertor and know I'm well covered. My main concern was the carry on allowance if I start taking heavy lenses.

 

[gqtuazon]

I currently have the 24-120F4 and it's a great lens. I actually chose it over the 24-70 as it's more versatile for my actual use with the extra range and VR. I'm sure at some point in the future I'll convince myself that I need the 24-70 My current dilemma is that we are planning a three week trip to the States next year and I'm trying to decide what gear to take. Decisions, decisions!!!

Geoff - my suggestion is that you can get away and capture most of your adventure / trip to the US with the Nikon 24-120mm f4 VR. I would supplement it with a speed light for indoor use. The other zoom lenses are nice to have but not essential. I used to own the 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 VRI and f4 VRII versions but later sold them to fund other items.

If you really need a longer zoom, I would get the 70-200mm f4 VRIII version but that's just me. For outdoor shooting, that lens is my go to lens although mine is the f2.8 VRII version but for day time shooting, something lighter is desirable.

 

[Geoffc]

I had the 28-300 for a while and sold it because I thought I no longer "needed" it with all my other lenses. Kind of sorry I did, because it's a perfectwalking around on vacation lens. It's really closer to a 28-280mm, and is a little soft at the tips and wide open, but not so soft that it ever felt like it wasn't usable. At a Scott Kelby presentation he mentioned that when he goes on family vacations the only thing he takes are a D600 and the 28-300mm. I shot with it and an 18-105mm when I went to Yosemite on my D7000 and D90 (what I had at the time). They both worked extremely well. On a D800 I think it would be a great vacation lens and have had my eyes open for another at a good price.

For me, it's a one trick pony - a vacation/walkaround lens. If I have the luxury to carry a small bag then the 16-35mm, 24-85mm and 70-200mm f4 are what I take. But if I were more concerned with space and being able to enjoy family time while capturing great images then the D800 & 28-300mm would be perfect.

Thanks Jake you've got me leaning back towards it again. I'll have to ask my friend if he can still get it at the special staff rate. If he can it would be a no brainier as I could use it and get all my money back if I thought it wasn't required long term.

 

[WayneF]

I'm planning to fly to Salt Lake, get an RV, do a loop of Yellowstone, back past Salt Lake to Bryce Canyon. From there we go to Vegas and get a car. Then it's Death Valley, Yosemite and finish in San Francisco. We are staying for several days in most places and spending 3 weeks in total.

Sounds tremendous.

Whilst not perfect these super zooms do a more than ok job, especially if you have light.

You could compare results at
Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis
Nikkor AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis

Seems like a difference to me.

Maybe I should just pack the 70-200 2.8 with my 2x teleconvertor and know I'm well covered. My main concern was the carry on allowance if I start taking heavy lenses.

The D800 36 megapixels will allow a lot of cropping. Even without a teleconverter, 200mm will crop to a 300mm view, which is 1.5x and equivalent to a DX crop. On a D800, that is still 15 megapixels.

But, the 70-200 is not likely the one lens you want to carry around.

Is there a carry-on allowance? I've always taken a regular carry-on, plus a camera bag which is considered a personal item.

 

[Geoffc]

Thanks for the links Wayne. I need o check the carry on allowances when I book.

 

[NVSteve]

I'm planning to fly to Salt Lake, get an RV, do a loop of Yellowstone, back past Salt Lake to Bryce Canyon. From there we go to Vegas and get a car. Then it's Death Valley, Yosemite and finish in San Francisco. We are staying for several days in most places and spending 3 weeks in total.

My neck of the woods. I frequent Bryce and Death Valley yearly, and I can easily say that a longer lens is not needed. Yosemite & especially Yellowstone could see lots of opportunity for a lens with reach, assuming you want to shoot wildlife. I don't know what to tell you as I've never touched the 28-300 & have no idea how it compares to the 24-120. I know that I would personally be kicking myself if I was in a situation that required additional reach that I didn't have. I don't go anywhere without something that will give me wide and a bit of reach (24-120 & 70-200 in my case). You mentioned going from Bryce to Vegas, but didn't mention Zion. I assume that is also planned as you will be driving through the park to get to Vegas anyway.

 

[Geoffc]

My neck of the woods. I frequent Bryce and Death Valley yearly, and I can easily say that a longer lens is not needed. Yosemite & especially Yellowstone could see lots of opportunity for a lens with reach, assuming you want to shoot wildlife. I don't know what to tell you as I've never touched the 28-300 & have no idea how it compares to the 24-120. I know that I would personally be kicking myself if I was in a situation that required additional reach that I didn't have. I don't go anywhere without something that will give me wide and a bit of reach (24-120 & 70-200 in my case). You mentioned going from Bryce to Vegas, but didn't mention Zion. I assume that is also planned as you will be driving through the park to get to Vegas anyway.

I'll look into Zion, I hadn't come across it before but looking at the map I'm sure you're right. Having checked my hand baggage allowance (18 kg) I'm thinking I might pack the 70-200 with 2 x TC, plus 24-120 and 16-35. That way I'm pretty much covered. I think I just talked my way out of buying a new lens!!

 

[Sambr]

I have had great success with the 28-300Vr it's so versatile. IQ is not that either.

 

[NVSteve]

I'll look into Zion, I hadn't come across it before but looking at the map I'm sure you're right. Having checked my hand baggage allowance (18 kg) I'm thinking I might pack the 70-200 with 2 x TC, plus 24-120 and 16-35. That way I'm pretty much covered. I think I just talked my way out of buying a new lens!!

Zion is one of the National Parks that really requires hiking to see the best bits. You could walk the Narrows or hike out to Angel's Landing (if you have no fear of heights), along with a multitude of other longer and shorter trails throughout the park. Even if you only have enough time to drive through the park to Vegas, the road itself is fairly scenic and burrows through a cliff for a distance. There is a short hike on the north side of the highway before you get to the tunnel that will take you to a great overlook. You have to stop and at least take a few pictures!

 

[Geoffc]

Thanks for the info Steve.

 

[gizmo285]

I love my 28-300mm. I just got it and took it out for some test shots. I thought it is a fantastic lens for the range and price.
The long shot is at 300MM and the second pic is the cropped version which is still very sharp and has nice contrast. I think it's a great all around lens and I can sill carry my 50mm 1.8g in my pocket. Just my 2 cents.