Really good lens. It’s not very sharp past ~200mm but it really has a look and it renders colors and contrast exceptionally well. This is a fantastic travel Lens as it’s not very heavy and not extremely large either. I’d been looking for a NIKOR lens for my mirrorless that can replace this but haven’t found anything with this range that looks as great as this lens’ pictures when edited in post. It really has a je ne sais qois - something intangible that’s really special.

I only recieved this lens last week, and have not had much of a chance to use it. Just messing around at home though it seems to take tac sharp photos. The build quality is what you would expect from Nikon... Tough and always ready for action... Again I would only use this lens with a tripod as the weight of the lens and D780 gets heavy being handheld for any length of time... But seems to be a very good lens and looking forward to getting out to put it through its paces

Senhores, não tem como não gostar do produto. No entanto fiquei um pouco frustrado de receber um produto "caro" (R$ 4.600,00) embrulhado em um papel fino, de baixa qualidade e o pior a caixa aberta (produto não lacrado) e avariado provavelmente no transporte . Diga-se que não houve a preocupação de se colocar uma caixa adicional protegendo a caixa original .Afinal de contas, sabemos que é um item delicado e que exige cuidados na logística.AttMarcelo C. Lo Monaco

Ero dubbioso, molto dubbioso c'è chi ne dice un gran bene e chi un gran male.Approfondendo però ho notato che chi ne parla male , come al solito, è perché non ce l'ha e deve per forza di cosa osannare le sue scelte e diffondere il verbo che un 11x non può andare bene.GRAZIE ad AMAZON ho avuto la possibilità di avere con me D750 + 24-120 f4 + 70-300 vr + 50 1,8 g + 28-300.Sapete cosà ho fatto?Ho restituito la d750 kit 24-120, il 70-300 e preso il solo corpo più il 28-300.Differenze con il 24-120 inesistenti, a volte poco meglio uno e a volte l'altro ma solo ingrandendo 1:1.Confrontato con il 70-300, questi è meglio tra i 70 e i 150 (sempre ingrandendo 1:1) più nitido e contrastato, poi le differenze sono inesistenti e alla massima estensione è meglio il 28-300.Tutte le differenze di cui sopra sono percepibili ingrandendo 1:1 e alle rispettive massime aperture, già ad f8 differenze non ce ne sono.La messa a fuoco, che molti dicono essere lenta, è in realtà nella media; la lentezza viene percepita semplicemente perché il gruppo ottico deve percorrere più strada rispetto a tutti gli altri obiettivi (ricordiamo che mette a fuoco a 50cm ed è un 28-300) e quindi "sembra" lento.Ho provato a mettere a fuoco oggetti non troppo distanti tra loro (2mt 3mt 5mt) con tutti e tre gli zoom e differenze non ce ne sono, prova di tutto ciò è che riesce a star dietro a mio figlio sull'altalena a 3mt di distanza con focale a 300mm.Il risultato quindi è ottimo, giro con una sola lente (e un 50ino in tasca) e riesco a fare tutto, la nitidezza al centro è ottima, ai bordi peggiora.Lo stabilizzatore è buono anche a 300mm e il mosso non è mai un problema.A 300 mm sulle brevi distanze non è un 300 ma molto meno, del resto mettendo a fuoco già a distanze di 50cm (dove l'angolo di campo è equivalente a un 135mm) non poteva essere altrimenti non è un difetto come tanti pensano.L'unico difetto è che non lo stacchi più dalla macchina..... anche perché per avere qualcosa in più bisogna andare verso i "soliti" 12-24 24-70 70-200 (o dei fissi) con tutto ciò che queste ottime lenti comportano, costo peso e ingombro, e in ogni caso a partire da f8 le differenze sono quasi inesistenti.Problemi di geometria e vignettatura ci sono (e tanti) ma con i corpi di oggi, o la post produzione,non sono più da considerarsi un difetto; addirittura in vista di tutto ciò si sono permessi di produrre anche i 50ini (i nuovi g 1,4 e 1,8) che distorcono e "vignettano" più dei vecchi.Unico VERO difetto è che lo zoom si estende da solo per via del peso, basta poco per ritrovarselo quasi a 300mm, Nikon a provveduto con il blocco a 28mm ma avrei gradito che ciò non accadesse, risulta alquanto scomodo doverlo continuamente bloccare/sbloccare. Sempre per via del peso del gruppo lenti quando si "zomma" la scorrevolezza della ghiera varia di molto in funzione dell'inclinazione dell'obiettivo.Infine parliamo del prezzo..... l'ottica acquistata su Amazon benché costi oltre i 900,00€ mi è arrivata d'importazione europea, il prezzo di ottiche ue in giro è inferiore di molto (circa €730,00). Visto però l'ottimo servizio clienti e le ottime politiche di rientro, la d750 kit 24-120 e il 70-300 sono rientrati senza problemi e con storno effettuato in pochi giorni, non me la sono sentita di restituirlo; è giusto dare ad Amazon ciò che si merita.

Un objetivo que permite cubrir viajes o eventos en los que es más importante el momento o contenido que la calidad de la imagen y en donde prima la discrección que supone no tener que cambiar objetivos sobre el peso. En gran angular y focales medias tiene muy buena respuesta sobre todo con f's medios (5.6, 8, 11). Aberraciones cromáticas fácilmente corregibles de forma automática en postproceso. El tele cumple su papel en distancias cortas o medias pero no está pensado obviamente para ejercer de teleobjetivo.

Voici un objectif que je possède depuis maintenant 3 mois couplé à mon D600.Ce que j'aime :- excellent piqué, dès la pleine ouverture- très lumineux- rapide- discret- range vraiment intéressant même si un 24 aurait été un plus sur le 28.- optique d'excellente qualitéCe que j'aime moins :- lourd pour un objectif de tous les jours- Pare-soleil de forme particulière ayant tendance à accrocher tout ce qu'il trouve dans le sac durant le transport- Vignettage quand même marqué à 28mm (facilement corrigeable en traitement DXO).- Distorsion marquée aussi à 28mm (idem)Bref je ne regrette pas du tout mon choix, préférant un seul objectif à un duo 24-70 70-300, d'une part plus onéreux et surtout plus encombrant, qui à terme décourage de prendre le 70-300 dès qu'on doit se déplacer...

Let me preface this by saying that I did not expect much from this 10x zoom. I ordered it because the 24-120mm was out of stock and this was in stock (for about an hour) and I was truly intrigued by a do it all zoom. Having used the 24-120mm F/4 before I knew that it would be a step down in sharpness with this lens. The results confirm that fact. I was initially disappointed in the quality when I view pictures at 1:1 on a D800. However, if all lens are judged by sharpness alone, we'd all be carrying 10 primes in our backpacks.I thought, perhaps I should order the 24-120mm and 70-300mm which theoretically would give me better quality at both ends. I ordered the 70-300mm VRII lens for comparison because conventional wisdom tells us that a 5x zoom should beat a 10x zoom in quality, right? Wrong! I've read Mansurov's review and expected the 70-300mm to as good or better than the 28-300 but my findings totally contradicted his. Perhaps the D800 has something to do with it? I could not find pictures as soft as the ones in his review. Here's the kicker, the 28-300 is a BETTER lens beyond 200mm than the 70-300mm. The contrast is superior whereas the the 70-300mm has bluish fringe color cast at the long end. At 70mm, the 70-300mm is ever so slightly sharper but again, the contrast is better on the 28-300mm. At 140-160mm, I found that the 28-300mm slightly edges out the 70-300mm, but again, contrast is superior on the 28-300mm. I have to chalk it up to the ED glasses in this lens.The corners are softer than the center. However, if you need corner to corner sharpness, a prime rather than a zoom is the lens you want.With a little sharpening post process and a resize of the image to 12MP or so, the softness is gone. The D800 is a superb camera in more ways than one. This is what it boils down to. At 1:1 pixel peeping on the D800, the difference in quality lens can be seen. Once downsized and post processed, it is truly difficult to judge the differences. For landscapes and 100% wall pictures that demand critical sharpness, you should look elsewhere. However, for me, I'm satisfied with such a versatile lens.I returned the 70-300mm and will keep the 28-300mm as a utility zoom with very decent 200-300mm range. Did I receive a bad copy of the 70-300mm? I don't know and I don't really want to order another one to find out.One thing to keep in mind is that during my test at 10 feet away from the test chart, the 28-300mm pictures are all farther way than the 70-300. Bear that in mind if you're going to use it for a faux Macro lens. There is definitely focus breathing on this lens.My rating is based on the total package not just on the sharpness alone. A 10x zoom that is equal and in some ways, sharper and better than a 5x zoom? That's a definite 5 stars.Update 6/24/12: I'm returning this lens. The distortion, even when fixed in post is still noticeable. Furthermore, I find that I refrain from shooting this wide open as it's unacceptable so it's a zoom lens that has a sweet spot at 5.6-8.

With my D300s I'd been shooting a lot with the 18-200 VRI for about a year. As a travel/all purpose "go to" lens it was great and practical to have. However, once I started using primes, I think I got spoiled for the speed and sharpness, leaving me wanting more than what the 18-200 could give me. So I sold it to help fund a replacement lens. After researching heavily, I still had trouble making a choice. I think it may be true that there isn't one perfect lens that 'does it all".I tried out a 70-200 2.8 VR and although it is as phenomenal as I heard, I found it a tad intimidating in size and price - especially since it would leave me needing a second lens to make up for the wide end. Then I considered the new 24-120 f/4, thinking it would be sort of a happy medium but I ruled it out because I wanted to zoom to 200 or better. I considered the 80-200 for the lower price, but no VR. I just wanted something sharper and faster than the 18-200 I'd been using. After getting flabbergasted over which choice to make, I stumbled upon news of the brand new Nikkor 28-300 VR. Although it isn't the f/2.8 and pro lenses I was looking at, I decided It seemed like a safe choice so I ordered it to give it a whirl.After shooting some shots, I already see that it is miles ahead of my copy of the 18-200 VRI in sharpness and contrast. It seems a bit faster in autofocus but still is pokier in dim lighting than I'd like. I put the camera's ISO setting on auto for the sake of learning the lens and it wasn't a big issue in the late afternoon shade nor with the images coming out 'too' soft at lower apertures -even with a full out 300mm focal range. I think for low light conditions, I'd be better off with this lens on the D700, which has higher ISO capabilities and with less noise than my D300s. Knowing the limitations of this combo, it will force me to learn how to work more creatively with flash or natural light with reflectors.Post processing the shots from this lens hasn't been the hassle I was accustomed to with the distortions and CA's I was getting from the old lens. I think that the colors are nicer and that there seemed to be less noise, as well. These improvements, along with the extra reach, make it well worth the extra cost over the old lens. It is a lot less cost and weight than the 2 pro (70-200 & 24-70 2.8's) lenses combined, plus you get a little more reach.My only concern is the obvious fact that this lens will not come close to the speed I enjoy with the 1.8 primes that I use. But at least while traveling -it takes away the burden of weight and cost of the (more than one pro lens) alternative and the inconvenience of having to change lenses -especially while on a family trip. Some say this is not for a DX camera because it wouldn't be wide enough at the short end, but I think it is just fine for me...I rarely used the widest part of my 18-200 lens - I was mostly wishing I could zoom closer.I'm still planning to get a fast telephoto specifically for birding one day. I'll use this one in the meantime, while I buy a bit of time to gain more money and knowledge before taking that plunge.Sample photos at flickr: [...]