Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.
Already have an account? Login
"28-300 w & w/o filter - big difference"
After taking a few shots with my D600 kit lens, the 28-300, I became suspicious, and just now ran a few fairly careful tests. Mirror lockup; IR remote; tripod etc.The test was the same shot with and without a (fairly expensive) B+W UV-1 filter.boy howdy! The shots taken with the filter on were all more soft than those without it. I didn't have to strain to see the difference.Now: have I just been shooting so long with a protective filter on my lenses that I simply never noticed before? (If so, what caused my suspicion?)Admittedly, I've not run this test on previous gear (D300, D7000) but then I never felt that the images were less than they should be either.So, perhaps a bad filter, although visually, it looks OK. I'm just wondering if the gyrations it takes to make a zoom with the range of this lens means that it really doesn't want any extra glass hanging off the front.In short: has anyone else seen this? Run a similar test with their own copy of this lens?I'd much rather clean a filter than the front element of a lens, but not if that filter is going to crimp the quality, of course.Comments appreciated.OH... a PS - is the front element of modern lenses more scratch resistant than they were 20-30 years ago?Thanks folks.