If full frame, then I want but the optimum rausholen everything from the sensor reprocess, the perfect photo!
I want the certain knowledge that it is now just may be my fault and not on the technology.
Well, just then I need a backpack, a strong back, a tripod and time.
There's nothing like a targeted photo session, with optimum results.
And for the Untargeted, Spontaneous? For the non-optimal? For just anyway? Without a second thought?
I've tried and was amazed:
The lens is robust and well finished. The body has a metal core, the first zoom level is made of plastic, the final stage of metal. It is anything but inconspicuous, extended 20cm long and also no lightweight with its scarce 800g. It fits snugly in the hand and does not look like rubber lens. Thanks for the 77mm standard size. A large lens looks at you.
So, as the People's Republic is imprinted gold. Only show? In fact, a real VRII, let him work and my old red VRs ashamed. The 70-300VR must now go.
So get into the great outdoors ... over all focal lengths the lens shows a good to very good sharpness in the spacious center. The edge sharpness falls off as usual, but that's for the application of no practical relevance. The lens has logically some weaknesses (distortion, CA, vignetting) - physics can not just trick, but can the Lightroom or Capture NX2 do loose in the post. The post-processed results were then more than convincing.
Test, I have run the lens against my 105VR Micro. And I have the scale to a 1: 3 reduced figure at 105s. Ingenious: The minimum focusing distance of 50cm at 300mm. I could spontaneously achieve the 28-300VR sharper handheld macro, as with the 105s (by that I mean more my performance :-)). Both stopped down to 8. The 105s had the brighter colors and better contrast in comparison (although stressed this a bit more), two small corrections in Lightroom, and it was hard to keep the two apart lenses (not representative test with two non-photographers who even preferred the 28-300VR, View 1 but significant ... but she was not interested, the 105s I keep - point Weil am tripod but better and it is after all a real macro): I did not quite understand, were in the 1.
After almost 1000 pictures I've decided I'll keep the lens. The 28-300VR is primarily intended for outdoor use, whether vacation, zoo, hiking, family reunion, sporting event outdoors, especially if you're only partially mobile (the volcano edge, guided tour ...) - or whenever you undecided is. The flexibility and the VRII also allow spontaneous and beautiful scenery pictures without a tripod and Objektivwechselei, especially if you are traveling with non-photographers ("nerve, now he again with his tripod ...."). After motto rather an atmospheric beautiful picture that everyone will remember, as a perfect photo.
I know, I know - we buy high-resolution cameras, to fight for the technically perfect execution, look at the critical resolution at the corners of the images to optimize and ... and when we photograph relaxed? Just because? Technically sophisticated, yet spontaneously?
For beginners who now here read something about "Travel Zoom" ... FX is large and heavy. The 28-300 is large and heavy. Anyone who takes an FX camera along for the ride, who knows what he is doing and why he does it (although that hardly anyone else understands).
So my clear recommendation for glass collectors and those who want to be there.
Or you have no Leatherman?
