Hi, I have upgraded my DX camera to a FX camera and want to start enjoying it. I want to get a good FX lens which I can use for most purposes, I have a 70-200/2.8 Lens. So I am debating to get a 24-120 but everywhere I read I see that the advice is to get the 28-300.. I value the opinions of the folks in this forum and would like to get some input to make a wise choice
I have the 24-120 f/4. I prefer it to the one lens solution because the 24mm to 28mm range is more important to me than having the 120mm to 300mm range. I rarely take long telephoto shots when traveling, so this is the perfect range for a travel lens. It fits "most purposes" that I need.
For the few times I am traveling somewhere where a longer telephoto lens is needed (say for wildlife), then I'll gladly take a 180 f/2.8 or 80-200 f/2.8, if not a 300 or 400 prime.
The difficulty in answering your question is that "most purposes" means different things to different people.
How much do you value the ability not to carry the 70-200? If that's important to you, the 28-300 (note: 300, not 200) is worthy of consideration. And the 70-200 is no small item, either. On the other hand, no matter what you may read, the 28-300 is NOT the optical equal of the 70-200 in the overlapping range, and it's particularly not the equal of the 70-200 at f/2.8...
There is also a material difference between 24 and 28mm, which is important to some and not to others.
Do you value versatility more than image quality?
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!
>How much do you value the ability not to carry the 70-200? >If that's important to you, the 28-300 (note: 300, not 200) is >worthy of consideration. And the 70-200 is no small item, >either. On the other hand, no matter what you may read, the >28-300 is NOT the optical equal of the 70-200 in the >overlapping range, and it's particularly not the equal of the >70-200 at f/2.8... > >There is also a material difference between 24 and 28mm, which >is important to some and not to others. > >Do you value versatility more than image quality?
This building was about 1km away. I took this TEST image with my D800/28-300 Nikkor combo, at MOST critical 300mm, f8.0, handheld. JPG from RAW data, LR. Quality of 100% crop lets me say that the 28-300 lens on D800 a hair is not as good as my 70-200+TC14, and my 300VR is even better, what wasn't the case with my old D3. So I may say if 28-300 Nikkor has gained a lot on D800/E, the top 2.8 pro Nikkors have gained much more on high resolving sensors. Dimitri.
I recently moved from DX to FX as well (D300-D800) and I also have the 70-200 which is a joy to work with, a bit heavy but serves as a standard to compare other lenses to. I had a 28-300 and felt “uncomfortable” about it. Sorry, can’t be more technically specific. The quality of the lens was Nikon, the images were ok (any problems there were mine), but the d**n sun shield just would not stay on. I now have the 24-120 and am very happy with it. Shorter at the long end, 15% wider at the wide end, but the main advantage is that it is f/4 throughout its range. For walk-about, 90% of the time I don’t need longer than the 120mm. For “light” travel I take 2 lenses: 24-120 and 70-300 f/4.5-5.6.
I'm a brand new member and a neophyte photographer so please excuse my ignorance.
I just got my D600 and 28-300 and all I can say is "WOW". This is my first full-frame camera (I upgraded from Canon Rebel). SWMBO only let me get one lens, and it seemed the 28-300 gave me the most options for my uneducated use. It is heavy, especially with the SB-910 on top of the camera. But, isn't that the sign of quality? I took about 150 photos on Sunday of the Children's ministry and used every ounce of the focal range. The church admin loved the photos.
Hi all first post here. I also just switched from DX(D300s) to FX (D800E) and purchased a 28- 300 as a do it all lens. I took some shots at a fairly poorly lit Soccer game yesterday and was pleasantly surprised with the results. Obviously a lens like this has to make many compromises in becoming a jack of all trades but if this is the only lens you have for a day out or just walking around without a bag it is tough to beat as it just covers such a wide area of usage.
However if I did not shoot at Hockey and Soccer games I would probably have the 24 - 120.
Based on my usage and results so far I have a feeling that the 50mm F1:4 is going to be spending the most time on the D800E with an 85mm and perhaps 24mm filling my coat pockets.