The New Nikon 28-300mm Lens is Here

68 Replies to “The New Nikon 28-300mm Lens is Here”

1. Thanks for a great review Terry, but are you now going to use your D700 as the travel camera or use the 28-300 on your D5000? Using the D700 for travel you loose the lightweight factor and video capability. With the D5000 and 28-300 combo you now effectively have the a 42-450 lens, which is fine at the long end but not very wide! I have a D90 and D700 and will keep the 18-200 for the D90. The only benefit to the 28-300 would be if you only had the one camera and it was an FX chip.

   Is the sharpness that much better that you would ditch the D5000 in favor of the D700 for travel or take the 28-300 + D5000 combo and forego the wide end?

2. The D5000 will still be my main travel body for now. I find that more often than not while traveling I need to zoom more than go wide.

3. I’ve been wondering when Nikon would come out with a full frame equiv. for the 18-200 and great to hear such a good review! Many times I have regretted selling my D300 and 18-200 in favor of my D700. Like you, I prefer 1-body, 1-lens for travel and this sounds like it! Now excuse me while I slide over to B&H and spend some money! Thanks Terry!

   1. B&H is the place! I got a really good deal on a D300s and the Nikon 28-300 for 2100.00. They offer nice discounts on lenses with the purchse of a new camera. I became interested in digital photography in 2008. I new nothing about photography, so I did a search on-line, and was advised to get the D40x entry level. I am glad I did because I was able to get some much needed experience. I bought the new gear (D300s/28-300) from B&H and just received it today! I feel like I have to start all over, but I am up for the challenge. Any advice for starters, anybody?

      Thanks,

      Yvette

4. Uh, what do you plan to do with the 18-200?

   1. It’s for sale. Interested?

      1. What’s the asking for a lens that “never got images as sharp as I’m getting them now”?

         1. Just trying to horse trade….

            By the way is it a version 1 or 2?

            1. @William, it’s a version 1. Make me an offer 🙂

5. Vacationing with one lens is just smart. Scott Kelby does the same thing on vacation. I leave the gear behind and had been only using the 18-200 as my travel lens until I got the D700. Then I picked up the Tamron 28-300 for full frame and didn’t want to like it, but….it’s actually been very good and it serves my one lens travel purpose. Maybe I just have an exceptional sample of this lens, but I’m feeling guilty that I ordered the Nikon version last week. Would love to see a good comparison of the Tamron 28-300 and the Nikon.

   Jim

   1. I owned the tamron 28-300 (pre-VC, pre-XR silver) lens and recently got the nikon 28-300 for my D700. That tamron is not a bad lens, but the missing image stabilization really hurts, especially when really on the move. I did compare the tamron 28-300 with VC at the store, and here is some data to consider:
      1. The tamron fully zoomed out has a max aperture of f/6.3 as opposed to the nikon with 5.6 – this means a little more light at that end (for those late evening shots of wildlife returning home, say)
      2. Again, just one experience, but the tamron took a little longer to focus than the nikon and was noisier as it did it.
      3. I shot down into a canyon with the tamron, and I had a constant problem of the lens sliding down – holding it at my preferred zoom was really painful. Unfortunately, never tried that with the Nikon, so no comparison here.
      4. I was told by the store person that tamron VC is a couple of stops less powerful than the Nikon VRII, but I havent experienced it myself. All I can say is that the Nikon VR is pretty good – I was quite surprised several time when I heard the shutter duration which indicated a lost image (handheld) and saw a sharp image instead.
      5. The Nikon lens doesnt extend out as much as the Tamron.
      6. I liked the colors in the Tamron, though that was used in the Canadian Rockies, whereas the Nikon has only been tried in cityscapes in cloudy seattle.

      Hope that helps,
      Anand

      1. Thank you Anand! So far I’m liking the Nikon a lot. I only have 100 shots with it compare to a few thousand with the Tamron. So far the Nikon is very nice. Not enough shooting yet to go into the technicals. But I wanted to thank you for posting, it was very helpful.

         Jim

6. Great review. I’m looking forward to buying this lens.

7. What is your experience with the lens hood? Mine does not click into place and would seemingly fall off easily. Also, when it is in the stored position, it does not align symmetrically, unlike all my other Nikkor lenses.

   1. so far no issues with it. However, I’ll have more experience with it soon after an upcoming trip.

      1. Does yours click into place?

         1. Mine new 28-300 VRII lens hood clicks into place, takes a little more force than my 18-200DX. Seems to be a great all around lens for travel, but definitely not as sharp as the 70-200VRII. It’s a trade off.

8. Hi Terry,

   Just found your site while trying to find a review for the lens (28-300mm) that I just purchased. I too had the original 18-200mm that I purchased in Kuwait. That lens has been around the world with me but now that I moved up to the D3S, I decided to go all FX. I’ve been using the 28-300 for a few days now and have to agree that it gets greater clarity and sharpness. I am pretty pumped about the lens and its performance. Coupled with my 50mm and the 14-24mm, I think I have most bases covered. Great blog.

   Cheers,

   Don

   P.S. @Judy Reisman,

   Mine clicks into place.

   1. Hmmm…thanks.

      1. Ms Reisman, with mine it took a very firm turn before it would click to lock.

9. Thanks, nrm, with your encouragement I applied considerably more force than usual (and also pressed the hood hard against the lens). It worked.

   1. Hi Judy,

      I was just writing you back to suggest the same. Glad you got it to work.

      1. Thanks to all.

10. Hi all, I’ve just bought the 28-300 nikon and I’me very pleased with the fisrt results. I’m using a D300. The surprise is when I shot at 300 mm with the 28-300, it reach less that 300 mm taht I get with my nikon 70-300 VR. Do you have an idea why I get at full 300 mm the image correspondin to aprox. 250mm on my 70-300? thanks

    1. Yves, at what distance did you have the 28-300 focused? This lens has a much closer minimum focus distance than the 70-300 so the effective focal length shifts more when focused at less than infinity. (The 18-200 did the same thing when focused close). But I’ll give up some focal length when I can get closer to the subject 🙂

11. Hi, glad you like this lens – I picked up one this week and am very impressed – it is excellent for a lens covering such a wide zoom range.
    Hope you liked SA as well – a favourite destination of mine.

12. Got my copy last week. Having an issue i like to verify. Focusing, Focus tracking is kinda noisy. Kind of a buzzing/sizzling sound. Sounds like electricity, hard to describe. Distracting. My other lenses make noise too which i understand is normal. This one is louder, and the pitch is a lot higher.Does anyone else have any such issues ? Need to know if i should replace or if its normal.

    Thanks

13. Help! Amateur photographer – full time sports mom. In market for a Nikon camera that would allow me to get clear shots of my sports boys while they’re on the field. I’m considering a D90 with the new 28-300 lens. I’m not fond of switching lens alot – generally I miss something when I do. Additionally, I’m taking a safari in June – want a great camera for quick wildlife shots. Is this a good bet? Any recommendations? Budget is a max of $2500.
    Thanks.

    1. I would wait for the NEW D7000 if you can and go with either the 18-200 (since you’re only going to have the DX body) or the 28-300 for sharpness.

       1. Thanks!

14. Great review, thanks. I just got this lens last week an immediately headed out for a short trip to Mozambique. I purchased this to replace the Tamron 18-270mm which I have not been all that happy with. I have multiple faster lenses but I was looking for that “one travel lens”.
    1. The range is a bit narrow, particularly on the D300 but that was not an issue for most of the time. If I was planning to be on a photo trip I would have brought the wide angle lens. But since this trip was mostly work, the range was not a big deal.
    2. Very sharp – I took a photo of the full moon hand held and got a great shot – with craters and all. Very impressive.
    3. Heavy – it does weigh a lot and fills up the small camera bag (Domke satchel). This could be a concern for some. Generally I don’t like to swing around a big lens in an unfamiliar city or in a rural health center. This is a big lens.
    4. Sticky – particularly with the hood in the storage position – when trying to adjust the focal length (this is probably a good thing but it id a bit awkward). Works much better with the lens hood on correctly.

    Overall, I am extremely happy with this lens. I did see a review that trashed the lens (mostly the price) and those who might stoop to buying a “consumer” lens. I guess they don’t travel much!

15. I have the D5000 and my wife just bought me the new 28-300 Nikon lens for my 40th birthday. I, like Becky, take shots of kids’ sports. I’ve been thinking about returning the lens for the Nikon 18-200 VR2 after reading Ken Rockwell’s review. He loves the lens, but says it isn’t worth using on a DX camera. Do you think this is valid? What advantage does the 28-300 have over the 18-200?

    1. If you’re only ever going to use it on a DX body, there isn’t a zoom advantage. However, I do find it to be sharper than the 18-200 IMHO.

16. Terry……I have a D90 and 18-200 lens as well and am extremely happy with it and I have many tack sharp photos, even when enlarged to A3 size. In fact, I have been submitting several to one of the largest newspapers in Thailand for publication and out of hundreds, if not thousands, of submitted photos I have already had two photos selected and a third to be used soon.

    I have not used the 28-300 yet but plan on testing it out. However, the only thing I don’t like about this on a DX body is that you lose the wide end with a crop factor of having a minimum of 42mm. Many, if not most, travel photos require less than 42mm. But, I also like the fact it has 450mm at the longest focal length. Choices, choices, choices.

    But, if I decide to get an FX body camera, such as the D700, it would certainly be one of the first lenses looked at and compared with the 70-200mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8.

17. Terry, I am totally amateur with little experience. I am thinking to buy a D90 and my doubt is about the lenses. You said before that the $300 difference between the 18-200 and the 28-300 is worth the money, but do you think it would be worth it if i buy the D90??
    Thanks

    1. If you never plan to get an FX body, then I would stick with the 18-200mm!

18. Hi Terry, I purchased this lens and am using it on a D300s and have been comparing the images to my Nikon 200mm f4 lens. For some reason I don’t seem to be getting the same magnification. When shooting with my 200mm at the same distance and with the 28-300 at 300, the images with the 200 are larger than the 300. Any thoughts?

19. Hi Terry, I’m new to the DSLR world, and have enjoyed reading your review of the new Nikon 28-300mm lens. I have been considering purchasing this lens as I do not have a 300mm zoom. I currently use a Nikon D3000, and don’t plan on ever using an FX format. I have read several posts saying that the 300mm is actually like shooting at 450mm with the DX, therefore giving me more reach than a 300mm DX lens; but I’ve read other posts that say that the 28-300mm FX lens is more like a 200mm DX lens. What is true? I want a sharp lens, but want the reach of a 300mm lens. Am I better off purchasing the 70-300mm DX lens, or will the 28-300mm give me more reach at 450mm with the 1.5x magnification of the DX format camera? Any help for a confused beginner would be very appreciated!

    1. A focal length is a focal length no matter what format you are shooting. What it comes down to is what the angle of coverage is. Since most of the world is used to the numbers as the translate to 35mm or FX (Full Frame) cameras they get confused when the same numbers are applied to different formats.

       So, a normal zoom range for a 35mm or FX camera would be the 28-300mm lens. To get the same equivalent on a DX sensor camera it would be the 18-200mm lens. Those would be roughly equal in comparison.

       Since you can mount FX formatted lenses on a DX type of camera you actually get more bang for your buck. This results in a 1.5x crop factor in order to compare it to the FX format. So, a 300mm lens on a DX format camera “look like” you were shooting with a 450mm lens on an FX format camera. That’s it. It doesn’t magically change the lens… it just crops out the middle and gives you an “equivalent” focal length. It’s still a 300mm lens in its physical characteristics.

       1. Also suspect that on a DX with the smaller format sensor you might see a slightly better image (other things being equal) as the light rays hitting the sensor will be passing more centrally through the lens.

          Using the 28-300 on both a D700 and 300s and the results are nowhere as near compromised as you would expect for this type of zoom range – just shows how much lens technology has moved on!

20. Hello Terry:

    I have many Nikkor pro glass in my arsenal and just purchased the 28-300mm because of all the good reviews I heard. Unlike my other Nikkor lenses, when auto focusing the 28-300mm, you can actually hear static sound/noise. Is this common for kit type lenses or do you think that’s there’s something wrong with it? Just curious!

    1. I don’t really notice any sounds, but I don’t have the lens here with me a the moment to listen. I’ll have to check it out in a couple of days.

    2. Hi there, I also had noise on an UK sample of this lens. It happened at focal lengths of below 40mm and was particularly obvious when changing focal points by a significant amount. For example, long distance 200m to less than 3 m or 1.5m to (say) 10m. Happened with VR on and off. D700.
       I had really wanted the lens for a trip to San Fran but was so worried about the possible long term reliability that such noise might bring into question, that I returned the lens (after a post on dpreview, and where replies indicated that there should be NO noise).
       I am pleased to see the great comments on the lens in these threads, and will try another sample to see how that performs. br A

       1. Alan, i have recently bought the 28-300 and yes the noise is very annoying!! it sounds like an electrical short-circuit, crackling/sparky type of noise, tried it with the VR off and it still has the noise, seems to be related to the focusing. In a quiet room it is very noticeable, outside not too bad with background noise. for a AFS lenses seems very odd. I have read many blogs with people experiencing the same. One for Nikon to resolve and to be honest wouldn’t have bought the lens if i heard this sound in the shop (shop was busy and noisy at the time)

21. I have the D5000 and the Nikon 70-300, which I really like. I have been thinking of buying a Sigma 70-200 f2.8, but this 28-300 intrigues me as a single travel lens. What would your thoughts on these be?

22. So I own the 24-70 f/2.8 which I use most of the time on the D700. I have the 70-200 VR II as well. I have the 70-300 VR as well. I am contemplating whether to get the 28-300 VR lens or not. Would it be worth it to get that and sell the 70-300VR or should I stick with the 24-70 / 70-200 VR combo. If I am travelling and using the 28-300 lens during good light (daytime), would that situation be worth getting it rather than switching back and forth between the 24-70 and 70-200?

    1. Ultimately only you can be the judge of which lenses will work for you! If it were me (and it is 🙂 ) I would sell the 70-300 for sure (I did). I would keep the 24-70 f/2.8 for low light and the 70-200 f/2.8 for low light and because it’s a great piece of glass, and use the 28-300 for everything else.

23. How do you find the AF speed on the 28-300 lens? Would it be adequate for shooting birds in flight?

    1. yes it should be fast enough for birds.

24. Im more than impressed with my new Nikon 28~300 I have been using it for about 5 weeks now on a D90.
    It takes great shots of just about anything ,even close ups of my Roses ,
    I shoot at Airshows ,shoot eagles that fly around here ,my grandkids ,they all come out clear, good colour and don’t require Photoshop touch-ups .

    I do find it a tad slow focusing ,but that’s not a problem for me .
    Im selling my 70~300VR but will keep my 18~200 for the old D80 ,

    Leaving me with a 50mm and a beautiful (new to me ) 12~24 f/1.4 G wide angle lens

    But Im finding that this new 28-300VR lens is stuck to the D90 all the time .

    Its a bit heavier ,I use a wrist strap to keep it safe and secure on my right hand leaving the mono-pod or tripod at home now .
    Have found it great for moon shots and lighting shots

25. I have been shooting with a 1st gen 18-200 for a while on my d40x that I upgraded to a D5000 as soon as the D5000 came out and while I like the flexibility, the sharpness does suck. I have the kit 18-55mm VR lens that came with the D5000 and also the 70-300MM VR, and so I ran some comparisons.

    First-off, the 28-300mm is an FX lens. Put on a DX body you do lose some wide angle and also reach, but it’s the crispest of my lenses, and while it has a bit less reach than my 70-300, it gets better reach than the 18-200. I’m not in a position where I’ll be getting an FX body anytime soon – I’m a hobbyist and love the size/weight advantages of the D5000, but based on my results I see myself using the 70-300 less (will still crack it out when shooting wildlife or airshows), and will keep the 28-300 on the camera for most other times unless I need to go wide in which case I’ll break out the kit 18-55mm lens. For times when I want to travel ‘light’ but have flexibility I’ll stick with the 28-300 as it’ll cover most of what I want.

    The 18-200 will get moved to my backup kit (aka the stuff my wife now uses!)

    In a nutshell, while the FX format 28-300 has a few limitations when used on a DX body, the quality of the image it captures isn’t one of them, and if you understand and can work with the limitations you won’t be disappointed with the images you get using it!

    The only thing now is I need to wait until Christmas before I get to use it freely, as it’s being given to me as a present!!!

26. LOL I just order my christmas gift, for me, from my wife (lol) and it looks as if I made a good chose. (from the above reviews) I just order the nikon d700 and the 28-300 lens to go with it. Now I can’t wait to get it in on 11-22-10. and get out and play with it. I told her that I needed a back-up camera to go along with my Nikon d300. This lens will be my walk around lens and my Nikon 400 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 will be for my wildlife shots Thanks for all the above info…….

27. Pingback: Looking For A New Nikon Lens | Photos on the Go

28. Terry, found you blog while searching for D7000 + 28-300 lens info; great site & content! I, too, was considering the lens and finally pulled the trigger when Amazon got a shipment of D7000 kits and honored the $300 Nikon Instant Rebate on the lens. Last night I notice the lens price dropped to $979 (from $999) and called. They reduced the price so I ordered a 77mm Nikon NC filter to go along with the new lens. Looking forward to the new gear. Know anyone interested in a Nikon FE2 :))

29. I saw a podcast from Scott Kelby on dtowntv and he said there was a canon version of this lense. Know anything about it?

30. Hi Terry, I’ve come across your blog as well when it comes to searching for the 28-300 lens. Now that I have read enough to be dangerous… I’m still rather buzzing from the info overload 🙂 I had a D5000 but upgraded to D7000. I have the 18-200 VRII but still not sure whether or not to bail on it. I think the pictures COULD be sharper, but from what I read the 28-300 lens is really meant for FX camera’s… but the comments lead me to believe its sharper? From your experience in using this lens on a DX camera… it significantly better? slightly better? Only better short? or Long? Would I be wasting time/money in trading up to this lens? I could go on with questions, but stop for sanity reasons. I think most amateurs such as myself, don’t mind spending money for something good…. it just has to make sense and work the way it was optimally intended.

    1. For me it has been significantly sharper across the board over my 1st generation 18-200mm. Now the question is “is it $1000 sharper (or the difference in price from selling your current lens?” I can’t spend your money for you 🙂 For me it was worth the upgrade but keep in mind I have both a DX and FX body. If I only had a DX body and NEVER planned to get an FX body then I would probably think twice.

       1. Maybe thats the ticket…. get the lens with the plan to buy an FX camera as a future toy. Hrmmmm. Thanks.

31. Hi Terry
    Maybe I had a dud, but the 28-300 did not work with my D90 I lost a few shots of deers with that lens. Never seen shots so dark in the middle of the day. I will stick to my 18-200. I am not a professional in any case the dealer took it back with no comments. As a Nikon user for all my life this is the first bad experience with Nikon equipment.
    So I do not know I certainly would have liked to get closer to those deers.

32. I, too, have just bought the 28-300, and am loving the photos, but have immediately noticed the focus noise, best described as electrical buzzing, static….doesnt sound like my other lenses (50,17-35, 24-70, 80-200)

    Can anyone clarify if this is normal, or is something wrong with it. It also happens to be a stiffer than used to zoom ring.

    1. I just purchased this lens and I too notice the static-like sound while focusing. I had rented this lens previously and encountered the same thing so it seems that this is a common affliction. I don’t know if there are units which don’t make this sound or if this is considered a defect.

       The other thing I noticed about this lens is the vignetting. I was shooting under bright, snowy conditions and when I looked at my shots they all had a very pronounced vignette and different focal lengths. I hadn’t noticed this when I was using the rental lens, but I wasn’t shooting subjects which were uniformly bright like I was recently. Have others noticed a vignetting problem with this lens?

33. I have bought the 28-300 and I found it better than the 18-200 I had with the Nikon D300.The 28-300 on my D700 works much better than I had imagined.It is super sharp, no one can tell the difference between the same photos taken with the 14-24 at f 8. The 14-24 is incredible sharp at f 2.8 and has something especial impossible to describe. For travelling I will take the 28-300 and my 17-35.because I don’t like to change lenses on the road and the 17-35 is ideal for spectacular shots,especially at night at f 17 f 2.8 in cities like New York or under the Eiffel tower, being useful as well when used at f 35 for normal photos.The 28-300 is ideal for cities and landscapes.I will put into my pocket the 50 f 1.8 for low light conditions.

34. I have the D5000, does the 28-300mm autofocus with this camera body?

    1. Yes it does. It’s an AF-S lens and all Nikkor AF-S lenses should auto focus on a D5000.

35. Hi . Terrywhite,
    Currently I have a Canon 400D with just 18-55mmF3.5-5.6 lens, this Kit lens give trouble after one over year(AF function not working due to inferior part I believe) , repair cost about one third of the cost of len made me lost confidence in Canon. Furthermore Canon has less good quality APS C lenses and lenses choices as compared to Nikon. Hence I have made up my mind to switch to Nikon FX body, but I am waiting for D800 because D700 has been on market for about 2 and half year, rumors say will be replaced by D800 in Feb/Mar 2011. While waiting for D800 to come, I am considering to buy either Nikon 24-120mm F4 Vr II or 28-300MM F3.5-5.6 VR II and use it on Nikon D3100(belong to my daughter). However I can’t made up my mind to buy which lens because both have good review, If I choose 28-300mm , I don’t mind to buy the Nikon 18-35mmF3.5/4.5 as well but changing lenses could be an issue during traveling, On the other hand, I am concerned about remark by SLR gear regarding the performence of 24-120mm in their Lab test. It says this lens perform excellent in D200 become so so in FX dody. Please advise, I like traveling and take scenery ,portrait and building.

36. Another lens to add to the list

37. I sold my 18-200 and 70-300 for the 28-300 and have been very pleased with the results on a D300. I always shoot a few comparison shots around the house, indoors and outdoors and the 28-300 is providing much crisper shots.

    I really hate changing lenses when I travel (or anywhere else for that matter!) and this new lens means I don’t have to worry about it. Additionally, I do plan to upgrade to FX at some point and this lens means I don’t have to upgrade to new lenses at the time I upgrade my camera.

    While there is some distortion, it’s easy to fix in DxO.

38. I work with cameras all day long. I work in Alaska and other areas with lots of wildlife. I bring these lenses and cameras with me. Nikon 28-300, Nikon 50mm 1:8, Nikon 12-24. Cameras: Nikon F6, Nikon D7000. This is my favorite kit as of yet. My latest pics just got accepted using these lenses. All of these lenses are used outside in daylight, and I have not needed my Nikon 24-70, 70-200 yet. When I travel I bring my 50mm 1:8 and Nikon 28-300mm with D7000. Best combo. If I need wider, I just move further back, like they did back in the day. The 28-300 is the best all around lens for pro and amateur photographers.

Comments are closed.