Reading mode: Light Dark

"Travel telephoto" for D800

Go to last post
S

simonkit1

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
284
Reaction score
206
Location
North Wales, UK
I don't really use a telephoto much but would like one just for travel/holidays when IQ isn't 100% critical. I did buy the 70-200 F4 when I first got the D800 and as excellent as it was just couldn't justify it sat on the shelf 90% of the time so sold it on.

The obvious choices are the Tamron 70-300 SP VC and the Nikon equivalent, I've already had the Tamron which turned out faulty so question is should I get another one, go with the Nikon or get something else?

Appreciate any user feedback

Thanks

Simon
 
I have the Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f4.5-5.6G IF-ED. For the price it is a very nice lens.

Here is a shot that I recently took at the zoo.



5c3591a049d7422192c3b38e9ff39326.jpg
 
I have a 70-200mm f2.8 VRII that also gathers a lot of dust. While I own and shoot with the Nikon "Holy Trinity", and premium primes, when I travel or want versatility, I put the Nikon 28-300mm on my D800E. This lens doesn't garner a lot of respect with lens snobs that look at extensive resolution charts, but I can tell you that if you shoot it at F7 or F8, and compare 100% RAW, slightly sharpened, crops with the premium Nikon lenses, it is almost impossible to detect a difference (of course, the bokeh looks better with the prime lenses). It also produces good images opened-up a bit. When I purchased it, I assumed that there would be a good chance that I would return it due to marginal image quality, since I am so critical about sharpness. Instead, I consistently get amazingly sharp shots with it. I capture a tremendous number of shots that I would miss if I just used my 24-70mm f2.8, as an example. I can capture a landscape in one moment and then a bird-in-flight the next.
 
Nikon 28-300 on my 800E more than half the time, so much lighter than the wonderful

70-200 2.8. Not much image quality loss but slightly slower focusing than my 2.8 lens.
 
Jeff2013 said:
I have a 70-200mm f2.8 VRII that also gathers a lot of dust. While I own and shoot with the Nikon "Holy Trinity", and premium primes, when I travel or want versatility, I put the Nikon 28-300mm on my D800E. This lens doesn't garner a lot of respect with lens snobs that look at extensive resolution charts, but I can tell you that if you shoot it at F7 or F8, and compare 100% RAW, slightly sharpened, crops with the premium Nikon lenses, it is almost impossible to detect a difference (of course, the bokeh looks better with the prime lenses). It also produces good images opened-up a bit. When I purchased it, I assumed that there would be a good chance that I would return it due to marginal image quality, since I am so critical about sharpness. Instead, I consistently get amazingly sharp shots with it. I capture a tremendous number of shots that I would miss if I just used my 24-70mm f2.8, as an example. I can capture a landscape in one moment and then a bird-in-flight the next.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with this. The 28-300mm is a pretty much a perfect balance of quality and convenience. I sold mine when I switched from the D700 to the D800 as I didn't think it would be up to 36mp (the d3/d700 sensor was very forgiving in this respect). I kind of regret selling it now, though I am still happy with my 70-200mm f4.

To the OP, it seems odd that you want to replace a lens that you never used much. It would be good to understand why you didn't use the 70-200mm f4, and what you want from the replacement - folks can advise you better with that info.
 
My gosh why not buy another Nikon 70-200 f4.0 lens???? I don't understand your opening thread? Why switch brands when the Nikon is one excellant lens for travel and image quality?

Larry
 
Not sure of your budget but have you considered the 80-400? It's bigger and heavier but for a 400mm lens it's awfully light and convenient, and the zoom range is great. It also holds up very well, sharpness wise, to a D800.

Pricey, but very nice lens for walk-around-telephoto if things may be far away.
 
You must be a strong guy or gal. I use my AF-S 80-400mm a lot, and it is a great, sharp lens, but my back lets me know I have been carrying it if it is for more than a few hours. I would only recommend it as an all day 'walk-around' lens for the young and strong :) Plus, when I carry it for anything other than nature shots, I need to carry a second camera with a wider lens, which is even more weight.
 
I also shoot D800 and D700. I love my Nikon 28-300 for walking around lens and it is my default lens that lives on my D800 when I'm not using something else. It has been to Antarctica to the Everglades to a family wedding. Plays nicely with the tripod and for HDR with and without tripod. It will not use a T/C of any kind but will use an extender for macro if I don't have my macro with me.

My Nikon 70-300 lives in the cabinet.

www.goldenoneimages.com
 
I bought the Nikon 28-300mm f5.6 for an ultra lightweight travel kit. I pair it with either the 14-24mm or the 24-70mm depending upon the nature of the destination. The 14-24 is great for scenic areas and the 24-70mm at f2.8 is better for low light and night photography. The 18-35mm would be another good companion lens but it is still not a "fast" lens for night use.

The one significant drawback to the 28-300 (or that matter the 70-300) is the f5.6 at zoom settings at 110mm and longer focal lengths. With any motion or low light the ISO has to be very high to compensate for the f5.6 aperture.

Overall the image quality for the 28-300mm on my D800e is surprisingly good and fine for general travel photography.
 
larrywilson said:
My gosh why not buy another Nikon 70-200 f4.0 lens???? I don't understand your opening thread? Why switch brands when the Nikon is one excellant lens for travel and image quality?

Larry
Click to expand...
+1

IMHO this is a brilliant "travel telephoto" and is always included in my travel plans on my D600.

Not just for the IQ, but for the VRIII that lets me hand hold static subjects effectively down to at 1/6 sec.

BTW, my other "travel lenses" are the 16-35 VR and the 50 F1.8 G which all fit into an easily carried pack.
 
Jeff2013 said:
You must be a strong guy or gal. I use my AF-S 80-400mm a lot, and it is a great, sharp lens, but my back lets me know I have been carrying it if it is for more than a few hours. I would only recommend it as an all day 'walk-around' lens for the young and strong :) Plus, when I carry it for anything other than nature shots, I need to carry a second camera with a wider lens, which is even more weight.
Click to expand...
I use the 80-400 when the 400/2.8 gets too heavy (provided it's daylight). :)
 
simonkit1 said:
I don't really use a telephoto much but would like one just for travel/holidays when IQ isn't 100% critical. I did buy the 70-200 F4 when I first got the D800 and as excellent as it was just couldn't justify it sat on the shelf 90% of the time so sold it on.

The obvious choices are the Tamron 70-300 SP VC and the Nikon equivalent, I've already had the Tamron which turned out faulty so question is should I get another one, go with the Nikon or get something else?

Appreciate any user feedback

Thanks

Simon
Click to expand...
 
How much reach do you want?

I find 200mm on FX to be not enough. The AF-S 70-300VR is a solid performer. But I think I would prefer the 28-300 for travel. It is just too easy to use.
 
Thanks all for the feedback... just to clarify a little

I already own the 16-35F4, 24-120F4 and a couple of primes.. all used for my landscapes

The telephoto will be pretty much 100% holiday travel only and convenience and ease of use are going to be my main considerations, not really IQ. As I won't be using it that often I'm also deliberately limiting my budget so lenses in the league of the 70-200F2.8/F4 are definitely not on my list.

I like the idea of the 28-300, I have read some reviews and the lens doesn't seem to get high praise but considering my main criteria it looks like it makes the most sense. That together with my 16-35F4 should make a good travel setup.. think I may well hire the 28-300 for my first trip too, great way to find out if I'm going to like it, in which case I'll probably buy one

Simon
 
If the 70-200/4 sat on the shelf, tele images may not be your thing.

I find this lens to be the perfect travel tele zoom.

maljo
 
I agree completely. The 28-300 makes a great travel lens. I have used it extensively on trips to Paris and the Holy Land and was really pleased with the resulting images.
 
Ferguson said:
Not sure of your budget but have you considered the 80-400? It's bigger and heavier but for a 400mm lens it's awfully light and convenient, and the zoom range is great. It also holds up very well, sharpness wise, to a D800.

Pricey, but very nice lens for walk-around-telephoto if things may be far away.
Click to expand...
 
Just noticed Tamron are working on a new 28-300 which certainly could be interesting, last version wasn't so good but hopefully they'll be making some significant improvements.. think I'll await its release before buying anything, problem hire the Nikon version for an upcoming trip

Simon
 
As others have mentioned, the Nikon version is quite good. Tamron seem to be placing the PZD motor in it's newest version. It's quite good as I have the 24-70 F/2.8 Tamron . Good luck with your decision!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top