Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S NIKKOR VR

[Manfred M]

No problem for me. As I said it's a matter of choice. But when his wife is traveling with him with a 18-200 on a crop camera they have exactly the same range.

George

We understand that but it was not a consideration when I bought the lens. My wife and I generally have a different view of the subject when we take a picture at the same location.

[Manfred M]

Okay George - time for a quick test done under almost "lab like" conditions.

This is the subject; a box with coloured artwork:




This is the first lens; Nikkor f/2 105DC which is regarded by many as one of the sharpest lenses Nikon has ever produced. Shot at f/11. This is at full size (100%).





This is the Nikkor 28 -300mm set to a focal length of 105mm to match the previous lens. The 105mm setting is not giving me the identical framing as the fixed focus 105 DC, but it is close. Again showing a 100% size crop.





Is it as sharp as a high-end prime lens that costs 60% more? No, but is it good enough, definitely...

[Stagecoach]

Is it as sharp as a high-end prime lens that costs 60% more? No, but is it good enough, definitely...

And with some basic sharpening it's even more "good enough".

Something that seems to be overlooked along with the simply corrected distortion that so many more interested in 'figures' seem to ignore.

[Manfred M]

Something that seems to be overlooked along with the simply corrected distortion that so many more interested in 'figures' seem to ignore.

I agree 100% Grahame.

That seems to be the issue with all of the review sites. Creating reviews based on technical measurements is a relatively simple task. Converting that to a number (or a set of numbers) is equally simple. Doing the test in a "lab environment" allows repeatability between different manufacturers and this is passed off as a way of legitimizing the tests. Unless there is context around the numbers and they are presented in a meaningful way, they are not particularly useful. MTF graphs are nice to look at and understand, but I strongly suspect most people don't understand what they show.

The question I have always have is "will this impact my lens buying decisions or affect how I photograph?". In my case the answer has always been a resounding no! For people that do nothing other than display their images on the web, the results are truly meaningless. For people who make large pints (for arguement's sake I will define this as A3 / 13" x 19" or larger, it might make a difference.

[mark4583]

Thanks for all the input, I ended up getting the Nikon AF Zoom-NIKKOR 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Lens 2 ring, B&H had a Nikon refurbished one for $399. The lens and Optics are flawless and so far the results are very nice, didn't think I could go wrong with that lens at that price,, I also think I will go with the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 and save a few $$$$ instead of the Nikon, I have seen lots of very good reviews on this..

[george013]

Thanks for all the input, I ended up getting the Nikon AF Zoom-NIKKOR 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Lens 2 ring, B&H had a Nikon refurbished one for $399. The lens and Optics are flawless and so far the results are very nice, didn't think I could go wrong with that lens at that price,, I also think I will go with the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 and save a few $$$$ instead of the Nikon, I have seen lots of very good reviews on this..

A good lens for a little money. I got the af-s version. Good luck with it. Have a look for the Nikon 28-70 af-s 2.8.

If you like it, some backgrounds of these 80-200 lenses. Maybe about the 28-70 too.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...00mm/index.htm

George

[mark4583]

is the Nikon 28-70 af-s 2.8. the one that had the hazing problem from the glue?

[george013]

is the Nikon 28-70 af-s 2.8. the one that had the hazing problem from the glue?

I don't know. I wasn't aware of that problem. Both the af-s80-200 2.8 and the af-s 28-70 2.8 where pro lenses. I know you've the af version meaning yo need a camera with af motor.
That link I gave you helped me a lot to distinguish between the different lenses. Maybe this one might be helpful to for you http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html.

George

[mark4583]

Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor is another I have been looking at also, some good glass for a affordable price. not as wide as I would like but worth considering.

[Shadowman]

My favorite lens has been the 70-300, AF-S VR II, this lens first came out in 2006, the replacement lens the AF-P is a bit disappointing because it comes in two versions, one for FX and one for DX, the FX version is not compatible with DX cameras. Recently sent in the lens for repair but not sure if Nikon will continue to service in the future so I'm starting to look for a replacement.