Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Mon Apr 21, 2014 3:45 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 10:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:02 am
Posts: 10
Location: Kuwait
I intend to buy the D7000 and was set on the 18-200 VRII lens based on advice from forum members. However, a friend suggested the 28-300.

I've found one site which said don't bother putting this on anything but a FX body, but unfortunately didn't explain why. I can't currently find other reviews which shed any particular light on this. Can anyone explain?

I would probably need to keep the 18-55 VR lens I have if I went for the 28-300, but I can live with that for specific indoor situations. We are going on safari next year and the 28-300 would be sweet for long range wildlife shots.

Thanks guys for helping a newbie :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1815
Well an 18-200 covers all you need as a one stop lens - 18 is wide enough for travel unless you want to get seriously wide.

I have the 24-70 and the 24 end on DX is wide enough as a walkabout for me, but I need a wide angle on top of that. 28 would be more limiting.

Horses for courses really, but if you're after a single lens to do the work, I'd go for the 18-200mm.

Of course there's a better option. Keep the 18-55 and add a 70-300 VR to your arsenal - IQ would be good and it's better value.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
Why not keep your 18-55, and add a 70-300 or an 55-300 to your collection? Better performance at 300mm than the 28-300, and cheaper!

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 12:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1815
Spooky, Mr Dutchman!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:02 am
Posts: 10
Location: Kuwait
Thanks guys. My original plan is to move away from a 2 lens solution - I have the 18-55 and 55-200 VR lenses now on a D60 body. The 18-200 would be the all-purpose 1 lens solution, and feedback is that it is a great lens that would serve me well.

Your suggestion sends me down the 2 lens route again.

I really need to decide exactly what my goal is here. Thanks for the suggestions - I'll go off and do some more research!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 6:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7896
Location: Germany
I've tested the 28-300 here and am very satisfied with its performance.
But that is surely not the single lens solution on a DX-body, as 28mm is just 42mm equivalent. That is certainly too long for many occasions so you definitely need a 18-55 or such-like for covering the short end.
Still it may not be such a bad suggestion - but for a single zoom solution on a DX-body you should go for the 18-200 VR zoom.
You should only be aware that the 18-200 is pretty weak between 100 mm and 170 mm.
The alternative suggested by Citruspers is also a very good one, but you clearly have to change more often in the focal range of 28-55mm than with a 18-55+28-300 combo. And it might just turn out that this is a range you use quite a lot...

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1641
I like the 18-200. Havent really used a 28-300 as Im not on full frame or film at the moment, and for me on the DX sized sensor, 28mm is definitely not wide enough for general use.

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:51 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7896
Location: Germany
Definitely!

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 9:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1641
Although, that is my style of shooting. I know many a person who uses a 24-70 on a crop body, and that is wide enough for them.

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 4:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:02 am
Posts: 10
Location: Kuwait
This is the key question:

Would the 28-300 carry out the every day, walk-about single lens solution successfully in everyone's opinion?

Obviously you win on the zoom capability and lose on the close quarters and wide angle capability, but 2 things are relevant there - I think I am unlikely to be taking that many close quarters shots in most circumstances, and if I need to, a lot of the time I'll be able to compensate a little by just taking a few steps back? I'd probably keep my 18-55 for real close quarters stuff - e.g. indoor shots of my daughter before a recent prom, and I'd keep that lens at home for situations like that rather than carrying it around on vacation or while out and about. If the consensus answer is no, 18-200 it is, while noting its limitations as helpfully pointed out by Thomas.

While the 70-300 gives better image quality, I think 70 (effective 105) at the short end is just too big? That would mean carrying around the 18-55 just like I do now with the 55-200, and this is what I am trying to change. I don't see this as the way I am likely to go unless at some point I decide I am OK with carrying lenses again.

Sorry if it sounds like I am repeating questions, but in the country I live in they just don't have these types of lenses in the stores to try before you buy, so I am reliant on you guys who know these lenses well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2011 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:42 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: The Netherlands
set your 18-55 to about 28mm and see how you like the angle of view, and how often can you still take the steps back as you said?

The difference in angle of view is in wide angle very big, 15 mm equivalent between 18-28 (27 and 42 resp.) and is more than just a few steps. In the end its your choice, we cant decide your style of photos.

_________________
- Wout -
Lowepro Nova 200 AW filled with Nikon D90 + MB-D80
18-70 DX, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 DX, SB-700


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:02 am
Posts: 10
Location: Kuwait
In all the discussions about the merits of different lens combos (and thanks to everyone for their input), I overlooked the fact that my original question went unanswered.

Ken Rockwell (who I see from other threads is not particularly well regarded on this site's forums!) said that the 28-300 is great for FX cameras but forget it for DX, but unfortunately he doesn't say why.

I don't want to waste my money if I choose the 28-300 so hopefully someone can provide the answer. I am guessing it is to do with the cropped frame/full frame issue between DX and FX cameras, but a layman's explanation would be helpful, as I am just starting to understand the technical side so a complex explanation involving a lot of jargon is likely to fly right over my head.

Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 5:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 5:05 pm
Posts: 50
I think you'll find Ken Rockwell isn't particularly well regarded anywhere on the Internet, except his own site. That said, his reviews can be a useful resource given the wide range of kit he has used, just so long as you know what fluff he writes to ignore and what to take with a pinch of salt.

The reason he said to ignore the 28-300 on DX is probably because it's supposed to be a 'do-it-all' lens, but it doesn't 'do it all' on DX because it was designed for FX/full-frame, so it doesn't go nearly wide enough for general use. For what it's worth, I'd agree with him on this one.

Edit: To elaborate, it would defeat the entire point of putting such a large range zoom on a camera - you get the poorer optical quality (more distortion, slower aperture etc.), yet you still have to have two lenses in the bag and change them out whenever you want to shoot wide. My money would always be on a more useful zoom range for DX like a fast 17/18-50 or the Nikon 16-85, then have a dedicated tele on top of that. You still have two lenses, but you get better image quality, more convenience, and less focal length overlap all for a lower cost (generally).


Last edited by fusi0n on Wed May 04, 2011 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 04, 2011 8:55 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:08 pm
Posts: 7896
Location: Germany
I'll repeat my first post in a more concise manner: Don't get the 28-300 as a single lens solution for a crop/DX-body. It just does not go wide enough.
A better single lens solution is the 18-200mm VR or mayybe even the 18-105 VR.

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2011 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:02 am
Posts: 10
Location: Kuwait
Thanks guys, got it. Am going with the 18-200. All purpose 1 lens convenience, which was my starting point, and a DX lens to boot. I can always use different lenses in future if my viewpoint changes on multiple lenses. Just gotta decide on a bag now - Lowepro Toploader 75 not the way to go.

Thanks for all the advice - job done!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group