28-300 lens

[Z-man]

I want to get a 28-300 lens. I have looked at the Tamron 28-300 f3.5-6.3 DI XR lens. Nice and compact. I was wondering if any of you had any experience with this lens. What about a Sigma in the same catagory?

[xerubus]

if you have a look at my gallery, the majority (90%) of the shots are with the sigma 28-300 macro. i'm happy with the quality for the price.

that being said.. i have learnt one thing... glass investment is a good investment. I bought my d70 the first day it came out, and paid a lot for it. didn't have much money left and bought cheaper glass. If i was to do it all again, I would have waited a little bit longer and bought a better lens, such as the nikon 80-200 f2.8.

[Onyx]

"Used to remove interchangeability feature from interchangeable-lens cameras."

http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/08012004.html

[xerubus]

nah

i find my 50mm f1.8 is spending a lot more time on my camera... and my 18mm is starting to spend a lot of time also. i basically use only the 300mm on thhe 28-300 now, for macro work with the 6t on the end.

[darb]

First 4 rows are with Tamrom 28-300. (lots of flower shots to look at.)
http://darb.net/assorted-personal

row 1 is 18-70 nikor. The rest of the rows are with the tamrom
http://darb.net/abr-november


All with the Tamrom
http://darb.net/gooralong

All with Tamrom (note : lens and gear was constantly dirty, dusty, ISO aws high, and often taken inside 4wd at high speed so may be a bit lacking.) ;

http://darb.net/lano-wedge-04/


All with 18-70
http://darb.net/brendan-21st

(mixture of both, but mostly the tamrom.)
http://darb.net/agm-04

[Z-man]

the Sigma is about half the price of the Tamron. Is it half the lens? I have concluded that i will use the kit lens for indoor shots and family shots more or less, and use the 28-300 as an all purpose lens.

[MCWB]

Z-man, where are you located? I'm in Kingsgrove, Sydney, and have a Tamron 28-300 f.3.5-6.3 LD IF Macro (model 285DN). If you'd like to borrow it to try it out you're more than welcome. For what it is, it's not too bad, but I'm now lusting after a Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. Depends on your budget of course, the 80-200 f/2.8 is naturally a lot more $$.

[Vicareyus]

Hi Z-man
Ah...this is a question I asked myself repeatedly before my recent trip to Hong Kong. I pored over every review I could find with an enthusiasm and application I hadnt shown since I was at University. I feel that I should have got a PhD for my hard work....but unless d70users decides to award honourary doctorates, it will go unnoticed. So, I'm very pleased that you asked the question, so I can give you my opinion. Bear in mind, this is the opinion of a lazy phtographer...ie. one that doesn't like carrying lenses let alone changing lenses! If I can do it with one lens, then that's the lends for me. However, nothing in life is without its pros and cons, or trade-offs, cameras and lenses included.

The Tamron seems very good...and the images Ive seen on various websites taken with this lens look good. But, in the end, I went with the Nikon 24-120VR. Why? Well, better glass, sharper and it covered the focal length I realistically would probably need to use day to day. I do have a Nikon 70-300ED if I really need it (but as I said it needs to be a pretty impressive picture to get me to change lenses!).

I use the 24-120VR all the time now - it is terrific - sharp as, good range, very quick to focus and on top of that, VR, which is so very impressive!

And...if you buy from Poon at hksupplies, I think you'll find its US$600 is much, much cheaper than the A$1200-A$1500 you'll be quoted in Australian camera shops!

Anyway, that's my two bits worth (or should I say two bytes worth).

Vic

[Z-man]

As to where I am from, I think I am one of the few Yanks on the board here. I hail from the Mile High city of Denver, Colorado..

I think I have come to the follow conclusion:

Ideally I would want a Nikon 70-200, f2.8 or possibly the a 75-300, and the 24-120VR sounds great. Since I cannot yet aford them,(this is the standard kunundrum of most photo buffs, right?) I need to get a lens to fill my needs until a later time. I think I will go with the Sigma based on the cost savings. I can save about half the price up front, and I don't think I am going to notice much difference. The extra $200 i can save can go towards a higher end lens later as I progress.

[Greg B]

As to where I am from, I think I am one of the few Yanks on the board here. I hail from the Mile High city of Denver, Colorado..

Hey Z-man, does that mean you can join the mile high club in the comfort of your own home?

[goodrich62]

Most of my shots are taken with the Tamron 28-300. Some are good so the ones that are not I blame on me. If you want some thing to cover that range there ae going to be some paybacks .
I walk around a lot with the 28-300. Works for me but I don't plan on posting at the Met.
http://patandrich.smugmug.com/
or hit the www at the bottom

[Z-man]

As to where I am from, I think I am one of the few Yanks on the board here. I hail from the Mile High city of Denver, Colorado..

Hey Z-man, does that mean you can join the mile high club in the comfort of your own home?

Been trying to convince my wife of that little fact for years.