Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Does the 28-300 compliment the 24-120F4
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 204324" data-attributes="member: 8705"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Geoffc, post: 204324, member: 8705"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Does the 28-300 compliment the 24-120F4
Top