for comments: using 28 - 300 lens with D90


chrissng

New Member
Nov 17, 2008
12
0
0
#1
Hi all, need your advice. I need a replacement lens for my 18 - 105 lens after my kid tested it against gravity... I am thinking of getting 28 - 300 lens with my D90.

I know tgat kenrock do not suggest using with dx body but i am thinking of getting fx bosy in future, so i am slowly moving to fx lens.

Any users using the above lens with DX body? Need your comments... Thank you
 

Cowseye

Senior Member
Mar 7, 2010
3,786
0
0
Singapore
www.ttlo-cowseye.com
#2
While you will miss the wide ends, you gain abt 3 times the reach. However, as similar to all super zoom lenses, you sacrifice quality for convenience. Worse, this lens is not exactly cheap. I won't consider this lens whether or not if I'm moving to FX, it's just not very value for money.

And KRW opinions is not very agreed by among some bros here too, including me.
 

chrissng

New Member
Nov 17, 2008
12
0
0
#3
Thanks for your comments. Then what fx walk abt lens will you suggest?
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#4
Thanks for your comments. Then what fx walk abt lens will you suggest?
you can't have the same or similar coverage on two sensors sizes,
either you gain some and lose some

you can check out the FX lenses listed here, see which part you can give up, wide angle or tele?

Nikon Singapore Pte Ltd
 

Last edited:

UncleFai

Senior Member
Mar 10, 2010
4,454
37
48
Singapore
#5
To be fair to Ken, he does say it is "perfect for use for everything on FX digital and film."

I did try it on my D90 - I don't like it, at least not on a DX body - too heavy and feels "unbalanced". However, on FX body, there isn't much of a choice for a walkabout lens.
 

chrissng

New Member
Nov 17, 2008
12
0
0
#6
Co i am considering 18 - 200 but its in dx format. I know its a good lens for walk abt. Tot i could get something similar for fx format lens since i am considering moving to fx body in future. You are right... I was considering 80 - 200. But i will lose the wide angle...

I may go mscolour to try the lens before deciding then...
 

yyD70S

Senior Member
Dec 25, 2005
2,454
0
0
Singapore
#7
The AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR on FX is indeed a very versatile lens on FX; what with it's 10.7x zoom! There are times like when you are on a group tour with your family: diapers, milk bottles, windbreakers and such and you just want a one-lens-to-do-it-all! Or times when the conditions are such that you try to avoid or minimise changhing lens (e.g. deserts, beaches, etc).

However, while you are still on DX, 28mm is quite limiting (for me). And the small aperture (e.g. it's already f5.3 at 100mm) is to me a disadvantage. Not forgetting the cost of this lens. All these negatives may not matter to you but you should at least note them.
 

Last edited:

h2chng

New Member
May 2, 2006
474
0
0
East
#8
I myself would not buy fx zoom for dx body. You may consider getting a used dx zoom for the d90 now from BnS. If you wish to upgrade or downgrade in the future, then you should be able to let go without incurring significant discount.

By the way, do you find the current 18-105 limiting in anyway? What do you want the new lens to do for you?

Cheers
 

Jan 5, 2010
276
0
0
#9
To be fair to Ken, he does say it is "perfect for use for everything on FX digital and film."

I did try it on my D90 - I don't like it, at least not on a DX body - too heavy and feels "unbalanced". However, on FX body, there isn't much of a choice for a walkabout lens.
UncleFai, can share abit what it is in this lens that you don't like? I have this lens on mind too, and will be using on a Dx as well as an Fx in the near future (probably after all the dust had landed for the D800 launch:bsmilie:, and assuming it really suit my needs from the users reviews). Can share about the IQ from your experience?

...no worries about balance or unbalance, as the CG of the camera and lens is always on my left hand at the barrel, and hardly ever hold up with only my right hand, so it's always balanced. ;)
 

UncleFai

Senior Member
Mar 10, 2010
4,454
37
48
Singapore
#10
MacroMarlin said:
UncleFai, can share abit what it is in this lens that you don't like? I have this lens on mind too, and will be using on a Dx as well as an Fx in the near future (probably after all the dust had landed for the D800 launch:bsmilie:, and assuming it really suit my needs from the users reviews). Can share about the IQ from your experience?

...no worries about balance or unbalance, as the CG of the camera and lens is always on my left hand at the barrel, and hardly ever hold up with only my right hand, so it's always balanced. ;)
I was comparing it with my Tamron 18-270mm VC (non-PZD). The 28-300mm was significantly heavier, bulkier, and the IQ is about the same as the Tammy plus I really love the Tammy's VC (though is is heresy but...) its even better than Nikon's VR.

Caveat: I played with the 28-300mm for at most 15mins.
 

xtemujin

Senior Member
Apr 1, 2005
2,778
1
0
Singapura, Singapore
#11
I'm using the 28-300mm with my D90 as a replacement for my 18-200mm, it was repaired for three years straight.

I decided on the 28-300mm as I'm able to use it when I move to FX one of this day.

Yes, the 28-300mm is much more heavier and bulkier compared to the 18-200mm.

However, I find that the 28-300mm lens has better image quality compared to the 18-200mm.

You can checkout my Flickr albums.

]2012 FEB[ Singapore Airshow, Changi Exhibition Centre, Singapore - a set on Flickr

Cheers.
 

Last edited:

playhard

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2006
1,339
0
36
#12
I used 18-200 for a while and decided to drop it due to its heaviness and small aperture. To the thread starter, I would suggest you to stick with 18-105 for day time and prime 1.8 for night time.
 

strikeback4

Deregistered
Apr 14, 2010
726
0
0
#13
I have use the 28-300 lens on my D300s and frankly I do not like it as at 28 on DX you will get 42mm, for me I shoot indoor events so I will be in a tight enviroment which is extremely narrow for me, I recently follow my friends in shooting landscapre as well & try it out, 42mm is not a idea range as well, to TS, you should only consider this lens if you shoot birds and out door events, this will be idea for you, if indoor events and landscape or group photos, you can forget about this lens on a DX body...

1 option is you can go for the new sigma 18-200 which cost only $620 in the local market, than when you upgrade to FX than sell off this lens & get the 28-300

The main reason why people get such lens its because its an all-in-one lens so you do not need to change lens that frequently, but with a 28-300 on a DX, you need another wide angle lens to compensate for its narrow view which generally defeat the purpose of an all-in-one lens, am i right to say so?
 

s1221ljc

Senior Member
May 7, 2006
826
1
18
#14
TS, you may like to consider the 24-120 f4. The 24mm (FOV 35mm FF equiv) is wider compared to the 28-300mm & the shorter 120mm at tele end still have longer reach than your current 18-105mm. It is a faster lens at fixed aperture of f4 & has better IQ too. I use this both on my D700 & D90 & its my ideal for a all-round general purpose zoom lens. Can check out a review of this lens here http://mansurovs.com/nikon-24-120mm-vr-review

The 28-300 is an excellent lens too but I would only use it on FF as it will be extremely limiting on DX as a walk-about lens.
 

Last edited:

Cowseye

Senior Member
Mar 7, 2010
3,786
0
0
Singapore
www.ttlo-cowseye.com
#15
s1221ljc said:
TS, you may like to consider the 24-120 f4. The 24mm (FOV 35mm FF equiv) is wider compared to the 28-300mm & the shorter 120mm at tele end still have longer reach than your current 18-105mm. It is a faster lens at fixed aperture of f4 & has better IQ too. I use this both on my D700 & D90 & its my ideal for a all-round general purpose zoom lens. Can check out a review of this lens here http://mansurovs.com/nikon-24-120mm-vr-review

The 28-300 is an excellent lens too but I would only use it on FF as it will be extremely limiting on DX as a walk-about lens.
+1 using 24-120mm F/4. Not exactly my type of lens but I still feel its more worth than a 28-300mm if both are priced pretty closely.

Actually, why Nikon nvr did a kit set of the 24-120mm with the pro bodies? Like what canon did with 24-105mm?
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#16
Cowseye said:
+1 using 24-120mm F/4. Not exactly my type of lens but I still feel its more worth than a 28-300mm if both are priced pretty closely.

Actually, why Nikon nvr did a kit set of the 24-120mm with the pro bodies? Like what canon did with 24-105mm?
I think they bundled the 28-300mm with the D800 in some countries.
 

brapodam

New Member
Jun 12, 2009
1,672
4
0
AMK
#18
I have use the 28-300 lens on my D300s and frankly I do not like it as at 28 on DX you will get 42mm, for me I shoot indoor events so I will be in a tight enviroment which is extremely narrow for me, I recently follow my friends in shooting landscapre as well & try it out, 42mm is not a idea range as well, to TS, you should only consider this lens if you shoot birds and out door events, this will be idea for you, if indoor events and landscape or group photos, you can forget about this lens on a DX body...

1 option is you can go for the new sigma 18-200 which cost only $620 in the local market, than when you upgrade to FX than sell off this lens & get the 28-300

The main reason why people get such lens its because its an all-in-one lens so you do not need to change lens that frequently, but with a 28-300 on a DX, you need another wide angle lens to compensate for its narrow view which generally defeat the purpose of an all-in-one lens, am i right to say so?
Some people have a UWA to cover their wide angles, so the 28-300 is fine.
 

cichlid

Senior Member
Dec 2, 2006
5,073
3
38
S'pore
#19
I don't see the point of using a ff cam with the 28-300mm lens. Might as well use D5100/D90 with 18-200, small and light.
 

Top Bottom