Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Lens

[Rodamu]

Since Corvid-19 has led to the loss of my volunteer jobs (I am retired), to fill the time and avoid crowds I have become very active in iNaturalit, the online inventory of living things. iNaturalist requires one or more photos of a animal or plant posted on its site with a location and subject ID if possible. Photos can be of tiny bugs or flowers, animals at a distance or trees. The fast Nikon 28-300 lens has proven to be the best lens for. this work. It is mounted on a D850 camera. It takes great macro photos. I have a Nikon Z50 with 105mm micro lens that is great but lacks the versitility of the zoom. When in the field one never knows what will suddenly appear; maybe a butterfly, an Acorn Woodpecker on a tree or a deer several yards away. When time is limited, the zoom works best.

 

[Pistnbroke]

I have used this lens for years ( I have two at present) for weddings and its perfect .(along with a Samyang 14mm for the wide stuff) but at 300 mm its not sharp enough for wildlife. The Tamron 100-400 is cheap (grey) and makes a great standby macro lens as it will focus to 1.5m. (I have two) .I suggest the tap in console particularly as finding the 16 offsets is not a problem with the auto fine focus adjust on the D850. If you do macro you must use the tap in as the offset at 100mm is totally different from just setting it at 400mm

 

[JAS]

I love my 28-300 and also use it as a macro lens. I have a Canon 500D closeup lens. This is a two element achromatic lens that screws on like any 77mm filter. It is two diopter strenghts and allows meaningfully closer focusing. Cost is about $150 but well worth it and I use it on many lenses (70-200 f/2.8, 24-120 f/4 and others using step-up rings to adapt for size. It does limit you to close focusing, but in a botanical garden that works just fine. For distance I just quickly remove it for the shot.

 

[Rodamu]

I have used this lens for years ( I have two at present) for weddings and its perfect .(along with a Samyang 14mm for the wide stuff) but at 300 mm its not sharp enough for wildlife. The Tamron 100-400 is cheap (grey) and makes a great standby macro lens as it will focus to 1.5m. (I have two) .I suggest the tap in console particularly as finding the 16 offsets is not a problem with the auto fine focus adjust on the D850. If you do macro you must use the tap in as the offset at 100mm is totally different from just setting it at 400mm

I haves gotten very sharp photos at 300mm with the newest Nnikkor 2-300. See an example attached.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Pistnbroke]

Thats fine Rodamu but I was suggesting that its not sharp for photographing say a bird on a rooftop and cropping in to 10%

 

[JAS]

Thats fine Rodamu but I was suggesting that its not sharp for photographing say a bird on a rooftop and cropping in to 10%

With that, I would have to agree. If I wany sharp at 300-400, I tend to go with the 200-500 f/5.6 which is not much of a “walking around” lens.

 

[Pistnbroke]

I have given up with the 200-500 and find the Tam 100-400 is a good walk around an effective at macro

 

[JAS]

I am a glutton for punishment and on short walks will often bring two bodies with different lenses. I use a Cotton Carrir vest to hold the bodies whn not shoting. It really helps distribute the weight. For wildlife walks I will typically carry a D750 with the 200-500 and a second body with the 28-300 or a 70-200 f/2.8. The second body may be an IR Converted D600 or my new Z6. It all depends on where we are walking.

 

[Rodamu]

For seriious bird photography in the field where the birds are at a distance I use the Nikon 200-500 mm lens. On the other hand when taking ID photos for iNaturalist, with the D850/28-300 combo I can go over 300% size an get recognizable image for faraway birds or close by bugs. Maybe I have gotten too old to carry multiple lenses let alone an extra camera body on my walks/hikes.