Nikon 28-300mm lens review: Best travel lens ever?

If you just came to find out the answer to the question in the headline, if the Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR AF-S lens is the best photowalk lens ever, then yes.  Yes, it is.  If you were looking for something a bit more in-depth, then I'll gladly oblige.

I often get emails from photographers asking what is the best “all around” general lens for travel photography, shooting candids of family, or photowalks.  This is it.

When the good folks over at BorrowLenses.com offered to send one out to me so I could review it here on the site, I thought it would be the perfect opportunity to see if this lens is as good as the hype builds this Nikon lens up to be.

Who is this lens for?

There are a few use cases that I thought this lens would be perfect for: (1) Casually shooting outdoor pictures of the kids.  I say “outdoor” because it isn't the fastest lens, but the gigantic zoom range would help to shoot in many different situations without changing lenses.  (2) Travel photography or photowalks where you want to take nice pictures of the area, but you are shooting somewhat casually on the go and don't want to haul around a giant bag of gear. (3) Shooting well-lit sports games.  Again, it isn't terribly fast so you need good lighting, but the giant zoom range would be convenient for shooting little league sports where the players can be right up close to you on one side of the field, and later be far away on the other side of the field.

So, I will admit that I wanted this lens to be a winner before I even tested it.  However, I try to be an impartial judge 🙂

What does the Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 lens do well?

First of all, the Nikon 28-300 is an incredible deal.  It's not a steal like the 50mm f/1.8 lens, but remember that the Canon version of this lens costs nearly 3 times more, and you're getting a very nice lens.

Speaking of sharpness, I wasn't blown away when I loaded the images on my computer–but I was pleasantly surprised.  It isn't on par with the sharpness of the 70-200mm lens, and it isn't really what I'd call “professional quality.”  However, that doesn't mean that it isn't an excellent lens that many pros would do well to buy.  This lens does remarkably well in terms of sharpness, vignetting, distortion, and a host of other image quality features when you recognize what this lens is.  This lens is for convenience–not the ultimate image quality.  In fact, despite that fact that I'm incredibly picky about image quality, I could very easily see myself purchasing this lens because it's perfect for trips to the zoo, travel photography, etc.

Having said that, keep in mind that I'm used to shooting the highest quality professional lenses.  If you're coming from a kit lens or a Nikon 55-250mm lens or a 70-300mm lens, you're gonna eat this thing up!  It's far better in terms of quality than any of those starter lenses.


What are some of the disadvantages to the 28-300mm lens?

As I mentioned in the introduction, I was hoping to use this lens for shooting the kids at the park.  The problem?  The kids move FAST and this lens does not autofocus very quickly.  Despite it's silent wave motor, I was somewhat surprised that this lens did not focus more quickly.  Obviously, this is to be expected somewhat because the lens has to move the elements far in order to focus at 28mm on the short end and 300mm at the long end.  So, the first disadvantage to this lens is that the autofocus is a bit more sluggish than the lenses I usually shoot with.

At 28mm, there is a surprising amount of barrel distortion–much more than I would have expected.   But this is also not a surprise given the gigantic zoom range.

Also, this lens is prone to vignette, and does have chromatic aberration issues.

What other lenses should I consider that are similar to the Nikon 28-300mm VR lens?

The 28-300mm lens is an FX lens, which means it will work on both a full frame camera (Nikon D700, Nikon D3s, etc) as well as crop frame cameras like the D7000, D5100, D3100, or the D300s.  Read more about the difference between crop frame and full frame cameras here.  Anyway, the main advantage to choosing the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR AF-S lens is that it will fit on crop frame and full frame cameras, but another option to look at if you shoot a crop frame camera is the Nikon 18-200mm.  In my opinion, the only reason to choose the 18-200mm lens vs. the Nikon 28-300mm lens is that the 18-200mm lens costs less than the 28-300mm.  So, if price is an issue and you have a crop frame camera, that might be a lens to consider; however, the 18-200 is not nearly as sharp and isn't built quite so solidly.

If you shoot Canon, but you want to enjoy the 28-300mm lens wave, you are mostly out of luck unless money grows on a tree around your house.  The Canon 28-300mm lens costs two and a half times more than the Nikon, at $2,500.


I can safely say that the Nikon 28-300mm is one of the best deals in the entire Nikon line of lenses.  FOR A TRAVEL/WALK AROUND lens, this lens is quite sharp and has good optics.  If you catch yourself leaving your camera behind or taking lighter lenses just because you don't want to lug around a 70-200 all day long, then this is the lens for you.  Do not walk, run to your nearest camera store and buy a copy of this sub-$1,000 piece of optical beauty.  Better yet, rent it from BorrowLenses as a thank you for providing this lens for me to test out.

14 thoughts on “Nikon 28-300mm lens review: Best travel lens ever?”

  1. And what about other alternatives? Sigma, Tamron? Both have similar lenses and according to dxomark.com (not sure how reliable is that score) they deliver similar results.

  2. The Sigma variants have been discontinued, but they’re still readily available on the used market for much, much less than the Nikon reviewed here. And as the previous commenter noted, they were reviewed very similarly to the Nikon one being featured here.

    Tamron’s examples are still in production. There’s the 28-300mm for full frame sensors, similar to the Nikon. And there’s also an 18-270mm for APS-C sensors which not only offers a wider angle, but a larger zoom ratio as a result (15x).

    And that’s to say nothing of other systems (Pentax, Sony, etc). The options are plentiful, and they all cost way less than this Nikon lens (not to say anything about the Canon).

  3. Oh noes…thought it was more than that…and I just went and got the 18-200….hmmm need to find a way to exchange up…

  4. Incidentally….perhaps worth changing the 18-200 to the 28-300 in the ’16 most outstanding lenses’ post too?

  5. I was considering buying the 18-200 until I saw this artilce. I ended up buying the 28-300 and love it! Thank you for the article.

  6. I bought the 18 to 200 which is a nice lens. I love that you can go close up and still zoom. I have an old Nikon 70 to 300. I miss that extra distance. Any place to sell my 18 to 200 so I can get this 28 – 300? 🙂

  7. Great review. Just a comment. Simply wish to mention another lens the 28-200mm F3.5-5.6 ED (has 3 ED elements) for full frame cameras. I am referring to the G version and not the D version. Second hand price is a bargain. It is tack sharp but slow to focus. Distortion with some vignetting at the widest end. However, the most amazing bit about this lens is that it is a pocketable dinky size and perhaps a tad longer than 50mm 1.4. It weighs 360grams only. This is my favourite holiday lens.

  8. This is in response to Alex Lillo. I bought the Tamron 28-300 VR lens upon the suggestion of a photography instructor about 7 years ago. I have to say I still love the lens. It is great and had a 6 year manufacturers warrenty (the lens didn’t crap the bed at the end of the 6 years either lol).

  9. Thanks for the review of this lens. Is there an advantage to the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 lens over the 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR or the 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR if I’m using a D5300?

  10. I have been using this lens on both fx and dx and it is truly versatile. The only two issues are: on the wide end you will be disappointed when you print larger than the normal size or print in canvas. Or zoom 1:1 on your pc and find noise which makes me want to cry. I would really like the 70 – 200 but in South Africa the price is equal to the D750 body and tht kills me.
    The 28-300 performs best at around 70mm on a wide aperture or small aperture, but you may want to increase ISO from f18 upward. Second, it is not the fastest lens and you will be wishing for the f2.8 if you are shooting any kids events. At ZAR19000 this lens is the best value for money that Nikon has on the market if you dont mind the distortion on the wider end.

  11. I am new to going manual and turning off the auto as I would like to get into travel photography a little more seriously.
    I bought myself a AF-S NIKKOR 55-300MM F/4.5-5.6G ED VR lens and a AF-S NIKKOR 18-55MM F/3.5-5.6G VR lens before reading this article. Will I be alright with those or should I sell them and save for the AF-S NIKKOR 28-300MM F/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens?

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top